A GRAMMAR 

OF THK 

English Language, 

IK A SERIES Of MITIRS ; 



INTENDED FOR THE USE OF SCHOOLS AND OF YOUNG 

PERSONS IN GENERAL, BUT MORE ESPECIALLY 

FOR THE USE OF SOLDIERS, SAILORS, 

APPRENTICES AND PLOUGH-BOYS. 



WILLIAM COBBETT. 
ii 



TO WHICH ARE ADDED 

SIX LESSONS, INTENDED TO PREVENT STATESMEN FROM USING 

FALSE GRAMMAR, AND FROM WRITING IN AN 

AWKWARD MANNER. 

With Notes by Robert Waters. 

KEW YORK : 

JAMES W. PRATT, 75 FULTON STREET. 

1883. 



<-£-fi/H *Z- 






COPYRIGHT, 1883, 

BY 

ROBERT WATERS. 



lr^ V 



EDITOR'S PREFACE. 

MR. RICHARD GRANT WHITE* S VIEWS; AND SOME OTHER VIEWS. 

Among recent writers on language, there is perhaps 
not one who has written more wisely, or exhibited a finer 
perception of the true means of acquiring the power of 
expression, than Mr. Eichard Grant White. His two 
works, "Words and their Uses" and "Every-day English," 
are marvelously interesting and full of sound, wholesome 
instruction. These books will, by any one uninformed of 
his novel views, be read with surprise and even with in- 
credulity ; but they cannot fail to impress the reader with 
the conviction, that they possess a measure of truth which 
is confirmed by experience. Mr. White condemns as alto- 
gether useless, nay, as worse than useless, the grammar 
studies of our public schools, and recommends the study 
of authors instead of grammars. 

Now, although I agree in the main with Mr. White's 
views concerning the character of our tongue, and the 
unprofitableness of grammar studies in general ; although 
I fully agree with him that our language must be learned, 
chiefly, from hearing good speakers and reading good 
writers ; still I maintain that this is not enough ; that in 
order to be able to write correctly, and to be sure that one 
does write correctly, a fair knowledge of well-defined prin- 
ciples is necessary; that the study of these principles, 
rightly pursued, is not only necessary to enable one to 
speak and write correctly, but is useful as a discipline of 
the mind and as a means of general culture. Theory 
must be combined with practice. For although one may, 
by a large acquaintance with good writers and speakers, 
acquire a good ear and a discriminating sense of correct 
language, these are not infallible guides ; a person with 



iv Editor s Preface. 

the finest culture of this kind may commit the most egre- 
gious blunders. It is precisely this which is so forcibly 
displayed by Cobbett in his "Six Lessons"; where he 
shows that persons of the highest rank, the finest taste, 
the gentlest training, and the most extensive learning 
have committed errors of the coarsest kind. 

Mr. TThite says : "In speaking or writing English, we 
have only to choose the right words and put them in the 
right places, respecting no laws but those of reason, con- 
forming to no order but that which we call logical." But 
many people must be taught tchat are " the laws of reason, 
and the order which we call logical.'' "Without some in- 
struction in these matters, common people will hardly 
ever write half-a-dozen lines without a blunder. Take the 
mechanics and shopkeepers, for instance, and you will 
find that most of them are unable to announce even their 
names and business correctly. Not to mention the ludi- 
crous and amusing errors of which Mr. "White himself 
gives specimens — the "inauguration of a sample-room," 
the "home-made hotel," etc. — we have only to look at any 
common sign to be convinced of the truth of this state- 
ment. " John Smith, Iron Foundry," " John Jones, Cigar- 
Store." John Smith is not an iron foundry, nor John 
Jones a cigar-store. We know that they mean, "John 
Smith, Iron Founder," or "John Smith's Iron Foundry," 
"John Jones, Cigar-maker," or "John Jones's Cigar- 
Store " : but they must be taught to say what they mean, 
and the only way to do this is to instruct them in the 
principles of grammar : or, if you please, in " the laws of 
reason and the order which we call logical." 

Boys and girls must be taught to write their thoughts 
as well as to speak them. It is vain to say otherwise. 
And the only question is, what is the best way of teaching 
them. Mr. White will not listen to the teaching of gram- 
mar in any shape or form whatever. Well, as far as the 
text-book method, the rule-and-word-cramming method 



Editor's Preface. v 

of the public schools, is concerned, he is perfectly right ; 
there is very little profit to be derived from it. But there 
is a right and a wrong way of doing everything. Mi*. 
White has never, I imagine, been a teacher; he knows 
nothing of the actual work of teaching young people how 
to write correctly ; he knows nothing of teaching, I im- 
agine, except by writing, which is an easy, pleasant, and 
convenient way of teaching — I say not a word against its 
effectiveness — for no questions are asked, except such as 
may be again answered in writing, at one's leisure, and 
without interruption or interpellation. If he were a 
teacher, he would find it impossible to teach boys and 
girls anything of correct speech without giving them some 
knowledge of the laws of speech — as impossible as it 
would be to teach them any science or art without men- 
tioning the name or explaining the meaning of any one of 
its parts. I do not say that this knowledge must be com- 
municated by means of a book ; it may be communicated 
without a book; indeed, much better without a book. 
But taught it must be. For when you have shown boys 
and girls how to write a composition, and they have writ- 
ten it, how are you going to show them or explain to them 
its errors, or how to improve their language, without ever 
mentioning anything of the principles of grammar? Can 
there be any better way of showing a boy that "He writes 
beautiful'' is wrong, than by explaining to him the differ- 
ence between the adjective and the adverb? Can there be 
any better way of showing him that "The book lays on 
the table " is wrong, than by explaining to him the differ- 
ence between a transitive and an intransitive verb ? Can 
there be any better way of showing that "I am taller 
than him " is wrong, than by explaining to him the differ- 
ence between the nominative and the objective case? 
That "The color of the leaves are green" is wrong, than 
by showing him the nature of subject and predicate, and 
that the one must agree with the other? These explana- 



vi Editor s Preface. 

tions. properly done, will be like taking him out of a thick 
fog, and putting him in broad sunlight : taking him out 
of a perplexing, bewildering maze, and putting him on 
a plain high-road, with a chart or compass by which he 
may walk right on to his goal, with perfect ease, and in 
perfect confidence. 

I have heard of a lawyer who, at a banquet of gentle- 
men of his cloth, brought out a toast " To the man who 
writes his own will." "Why? Because he is likely to 
make use of language that will admit of question as to 
meaning: and thus give work to the lawyers. Now I 
maintain that the man who acquires a clear comprehension 
of the principles of our language may write in such a 
manner as to defy the astutest lawyer to make his 
words mean anything else than what he intends them 
to mean ; which is something that cannot be said of the 
man who learns only by talking and reading. Such a man 
lives in the land of uncertainty, and never knows whither 
he is going or whence he has come. 

Grammar, properly considered and properly taught, is 
nothing but an unfolding of general principles, which 
must be applied, more or less, in all languages ; every one 
of which principles has a reason for its existence, and the 
majority of which may be made as plain and evident as a 
statement in mathematics. Mr. TThite says that nobody 
that thinks of his grammar while writing will ever write 
a sentence worth reading. Of course, no boy or girl 
ought for a moment to think of his grammar while writing 
a composition; in fact, nobody ever does think of his 
grammar while intent on putting down his thoughts. 
But when the work is doxe, when he has written it, then 
he ought to be able to review it understandingly, and see 
that it conforms to "the laws of reason and the order 
which we call logical"; otherwise he will, in nine cases 
out- of ten, write incorrectly. 

I fully agree with Mr. White, that all the grammars of 



Editor's Preface. vii 

Brown, Green, White, and Black, may be thrown into the 
fire, and the world will be none the worse off; for, in my 
opinion, boys and girls ought to be taught the principles 
of English grammar without placing any text-book what- 
ever in their hands. Never did the Board of Education 
of New York adopt a wiser resolution than that recently 
adopted, abolishing grammar text-books from the public 
schools, in all but the two higher grades. Any person, 
that requires a book in the hands of his scholars in order 
to teach them the principles of English grammar, is no 
teacher; he is simply a crammer-down of other people's 
teaching, which he has himself been unable to master. 
A genuine teacher requires, in order to teach grammar, 
nothing but the blackboard and a piece of chalk ; all the 
rest must come out of his head or out of the heads of his 
scholars. He may make use of what books he pleases in 
building up his own knowledge ; but no book should ever 
be -placed in the hands of his scholars. To children, 
books on the subject of grammar are generally in a dead 
language; it is all Greek to them; the living speech of 
the teacher is the only language they can understand. 
Away, therefore, with all grammar text-books; for they 
are the dead-weights of progress, fatal to all true teaching. 

Nor is this book of Cobbett's intended for boys and 
girls at school; it is for those who are studying out of 
school; for those who are trying to acquire that real, 
practical, profitable knowledge which is acquired by 
self-exertion, or self-help; for those who have no teacher, 
and are striving to teach themselves; for those who 
wish to learn in order to teach; for those who have 
failed to make any proper progress by means of other 
grammars, and now' wish to understand and master the 
subject for themselves. 

I do not deny that this book, being so entirely different 
from all other grammars; so conversational, easy, and 
plain in its character; I do not deny that it may be ad- 



viii Editor's Preface. 

vantageously used by school-boys under a competent 
teacher; nay, even under an incompetent teacher; — in 
fact, if the teacher must use a text-book, he cannot select 
a better one than Cobbett's ; — but what I maintain is, that 
it is the only grammar that can be profitably used with- 
out a teacher ; the only book that can teach grammar by 
itself to those who are learning for themselves. As 
long as principles last, and as long as men learn by using 
their reason, grammar in some shape must be taught; 
and this being granted, I contend that there is no better 
way of teaching it than this way of Cobbett's. Of 
course, no child ought ever to be taught a word about 
grammar until he has learned to read fluently, and even 
write tolerably well, the words of his native language; 
not until he has attained his twelfth or fourteenth year; 
for grammar is a matter which cannot be rightly under- 
stood and assimilated before that age. This is another 
reason why the action of the New York Board of Educa- 
tion is a wise one. 

Some of Mr. "White's readers — feeling, no doubt, as I 
did, that even if all ordinary grammars are worthless, 
some grammar of some sort is necessary, and being de- 
lighted by his clear and sensible manner of writing — 
requested him to write a grammar ; one of them declaring 
that if he did so, a future generation would rise up and 
call him blessed. Whereupon Mr. WTiite makes the fol- 
lowing amusing and significant reply: "I would gladly 
act on this suggestion if it were probable that any re- 
sponsible and competent publisher would make it prudent 
for me to do so. It would be delightf ul to believe that 
the next generation would rise up and call me blessed ; 
but I am of necessity much more interested in the ques- 
tion whether the present generation would rise up and 
put its hand into its pocket to pay me for my labor. Any 
one who is acquainted with the manner in which school- 
books are 'introduced* in this country, knows that the 



Editor's Preface. ix 

opinions of competent persons upon the merits of a book 
have the least possible influence upon its coming suf- 
ficiently into vogue to make its publication profitable; 
and publishers, like other men of business, work for 
money. One of the trade made, I know — although not 
to me — an answer like this to a proposition to publish a 
short series of school-books: 'I believe your books are 
excellent ; but supposing that they are all that you be- 
lieve them to be, I should, after stereotyping them, be 
obliged to spend $100,000 in introducing them. I am 
not prepared to do this, and therefore I must say No, at 
once. The merit of a book has nothing to do with its 
value in trade.' And the speaker was a man of experi- 
ence. * 

Now, I am strongly inclined to think that these ad- 
mirers of Mr. "White's, and all those disgusted with the 
ordinary grammars and the ordinary methods of teaching 
grammar, will, if made acquainted with Cobbett's little 
grammar, which has long been out of print in this coun- 
try, find what they want, or nearly what they want ; for 
there does not exist in our language a clearer exposition 
of the nature of English grammar than this by Cobbett, 
The very language of the grammar itself is a capital illus- 
tration of how one ought to write ; and if the scholar's 
understanding the subject is a true test of the proper 
learning of it, then no other grammar can, in the attain- 
ment of this end, be compared with this ; for thousands, 
who have failed to understand the subject by other gram- 
mars, have succeeded by this, and have, no doubt, risen 
up and called Cobbett blessed for writing it. Even Mr. 
White himself, who looks upon most other grammars as 
worse than useless, declares of Cobbett's grammar, that 
he has "read it with great admiration, both for the 
soundness of its teaching and the excellence of its sys- 

* " Words and their Uses," p. 427. 



x Editors Preface. 

teni."* And lie also declares, I th ink <I quote from 
memory), that if grammar is to be taught at all it can- 
not be taught better than by this method of Cobbettfa 

At a meeting of school superintendents held recent.y 
in Iowa, one of the superintendents read a paper on : m 
books, in which he says: "Men of letters and men of 
nee have sought to veil their thoughts with the ob- 
scurity of strange and foreign terms rather than to make 
the road following them in their investigation easy. They 
have sought the vain-glory of stnltifactian in their selec- 
tion of a medium for the communication of their thoughts, 
rather than the lasting -equent upon a simple 

style. Hence the difficulty in following them in their 
md the unpron - : being taught how 

read thought from printed characters." If their 
one writer in the whole range of English liter:.: -.ire who 
deserves more praise than another for avoiding this very 
style, so common among ordinary writers : if there is one 
author who is more conspicuous than any other for cloth- 
ing his thoughts in plain, intelligible language, it is Wil- 
liam Cobbett. In all : the making up of good 
English speech, he has no superior. He was the first 
show how one ought to write for young people, the first 
to write in a manner that plain people could understand: 
the first to instni si in a truly edifying manner. It is his 
great glory that he uses simple, plain language, and he 
niak- abject he torches, whether it be the defini- 
tion of a verb or the explanation of the nature of the 
national debt, perfectly clear and intelligible. 

The Editor has endeavored to write the notes in some- 
thing of the same plain and easy style as that in which 
Col ::en the gra m mar, keeping constantly in 

mind that he ;>uth of fourteen or fifteen 

years of age. Of course, he has never for a moment 
thought of imitating Cobbett ? . but simply and only of 
making the matter plain. 

* "E very-day E stotheNef Time*. 



Contents of the Grammar. 



Letter Page 

I. — Introduction 1 

II. — Definition of Grammar and of its Different 

Branches or Parts 8 

III. — Etymology : the Different Parts of Speech, 

or Sorts of Words 15 

IV. — Etymology of Articles 24 

V. — Etymology of Nouns 27 

VI. — Etymology of Pronouns 38 

VII. — Etymology of Adjectives 47 

VIZI.— Etymology of Verbs 50 

IX.— Etymology of Adverbs 83 

X. — Etymology of Prepositions 86 

XI. — Etymology of Conjunctions 89 

XII. — Cautionary Remarks 89 

XIII.— Syntax Generally Considered .... 92 

XIV. — Syntax : the Points and Marks made use of 

in Writing 93 

XV. — Syntax, as relating to Articles 106 

XVI. — Syntax, as relating to Nouns 109 

XVII. — Syntax, as relating to Pronouns 115 

XVIII. — Syntax, as relating to Adjectives 139 

XIX.— Syntax, as relating to Verbs 142 



xii Contents of the Grammar. 

Letter Page 
XX. — Syntax, as relating to Adverbs, Preposi- 
tions, and Conjunctions 184 

XXI. — Specimens of False Grammar, taken from 
the Writings of Dr. Johnson, and from 

those of Dr. Watts 187 

XXII. — Errors and Nonsense in a King's Speech . . 209 
XXIII. — On Putting Sentences together, and on 

Figurative Language 223 

THE SIX LESSONS. 

XXTV. — Six Lessons, intended to prevent States- 
men from using False Grammar, and 
from writing in an Awkward Manner. . . 230 
Lesson 

I. — On the Speech of the Eight Honorable 
Manners Sutton, Speaker of the House 

of Commons 233 

II. — On His Majesty's Speech at the Close of 

the Session in 1819 240 

III. — On the Note of Lord Castlereagh relative 

to the Museums at Paris 246 

IV. — On the Dispatch of the Duke of Wellington 

relative to the Same Subject 252 

V. — On a Note to Lord Castlereagh relative to 

the French Slave Trade 256 

VI. — On Dispatches of the Marquis Wellesley 
relative to the State of Ireland in 1822 . 
-—Charge of the Bishop of Winchester, . ♦ 260 



DEDICATION. 



TO HER MOST GRACIQU«i MAJESTY, 

QUEEN CAROLINE. 

May it please your Majesty, 

A work, having for its objects, to lay the solid founda- 
tion of literary knowledge amongst the laboring classes 
of the community ; to give practical effect to the natural 
genius found in the soldier, the sailor, the apprentice, and 
the plough-boy; and to make that genius a perennial 
source of wealth, strength, and safety to the kingdom; 
such a work naturally seeks the approbation of your 
majesty, who, amongst all the royal personages of the 
present age, is the only one that appeal's to have justly 
estimated the value of the people. 

The nobles and the hierarchy have long had the arro- 
gance to style themselves the pillars that support the 
throne. But, as your majesty has now clearly ascertained, 
royalty has, in the hour of need, no efficient supporters 
but the people. 

During your majesty's long, arduous, magnanimous, 
and gallant struggle against matchless fraud and bound- 



xiv Dedication. 

less power, it must have inspired you with great confi- 
dence to perceive the wonderful intelligence and talent of 
your millions of friends ; while your majesty cannot have 
failed to observe, that the haughty and insolent few who 
have been your enemies, have, upon all occasions, ex- 
hibited an absence of knowledge, a poverty of genius, a 
feebleness of intellect, which nothing but a constant asso- 
ciation with malevolence and perfidy could prevent from 
being ascribed to dotage or idiocy. 

That to her, whose great example is so well calculated 
to inspire us with a love of useful knowledge, and to 
stimulate us to perseverance in its pursuit ; that to her, 
the records of whose magnanimity and courage will make 
mean spite and cowardice hide their heads to the end of 
time ; that to her, who, while in foreign lands, did honor 
to Britain's throne, and to Britain herself, by opening the 
debtor's prison, and by setting the captive Christian free ; 
that to her, who has so long had to endure all the suffer- 
ings that nialice could invent and tyranny execute ; that 
to her, God may grant, to know no more of sorrow, but 
long to live in health, prosperity, and glory, surrounded 
and supported by a grateful and admiring people, is the 
humble prayer of 

Tour majesty's most dutiful 

And most devoted servant, 

WILLIAM COBBETT. 
London, Nov. 25th, 1820. 



TO 



Mr. James Paul Cobbett. 



LETTER I. 

INTRODUCTION. 

North Hempstead, Long Island, Dec. 6, 1817. 
My dear Little James : 

You have now arrived at the age of fourteen years with- 
out ever having been bidden, or even advised, to look into 
a book ; and all you know of reading or of writing you 
owe to your own unbiassed taste and choice. But, while 
you have lived unpersecuted by such importunities, you 
have had the very great advantage of being bred up under 
a roof beneath which no cards, no dice, no gaming, no 
senseless pastime of any description, ever found a place. 
In the absence of these, books naturally became your com- 
panions during some part of your time : you have read 
and have written, because you saw your elders read and 
write, just as you have learned to ride and hunt and 
shoot, to dig the beds in the garden, to trim the flowers 
and to prune the trees. The healthful exercise, and the 
pleasures, unmixed with fear, which you have derived 
from these sources, have given you " a sound mind in a 
sound body," and this, says an English writer, whose 
works you will by-and-by read, " is the greatest blessing 
that God can give to man." 

It is true that this is a very great blessing ; but mere 
1 



2 Introduction. 

soundness of mind, without any mental acquirements, is 
possessed by millions ; it is an ordinary possession ; and 
it gives a man no fair pretensions to merit, because he 
owes it to accident, and not to any thing done by himself. 
But knowledge, in any art or science, being always the 
fruit of observation, study, or practice, gives, in proportion 
to its extent and usefulness, the possessor a just claim to 
respect. We do, indeed, often see all the outward marks 
of respect bestowed upon persons merely because they 
are rich or powerful ; but these, while they are bestowed 
with pain, are received without pleasure. They drop from 
the tongue or beam from the features, but have no com- 
munication with the heart. They are not the voluntary 
offerings of admiration, or of gratitude ; but are extorted 
from the hopes, the fears, the anxieties, of poverty, of 
meanness, or of guilt. Nor is respect due to honesty, 
fidelity, or any such qualities; because dishonesty and 
perfidy are crimes. To entitle a man to respect, there 
must be something of his own doing, beyond the bounds 
of his well-known duties and obligations. 

Therefore, being extremely desirous to see you, my 
dear James, an object of respect, I now call upon you to 
apply your mind to the acquiring of that kind of knowl- 
edge which is inseparable from an acquaintance with 
books ; for, though knowledge in every art and science is, 
if properly applied, worthy of praise in proportion to its 
extent and usefulness, there are some kinds of knowledge 
which are justly considered as of a superior order, not 
only because the possession of them is a proof of more 
than ordinary industry and talent, but because the appli- 
cation of them has naturally a more powerful influence in 
the affairs and on the condition of our friends, acquaint- 
ances, neighbors, and country. Blake, the Titchfield 
thatcher, who broke his leg into splinters in falling from 
a wheat-rick, was, on account of the knowledge which he 
possessed, beyond that of laborers in general, an object 



Introduction. 3 

of respect ; but, in its degree, and in the feelings from 
which it arose, how different was that respect from the 
respect due to our excellent neighbor, Mr. Blundell, who 
restored the leg to perfect use, after six garrison and 
army surgeons had declared that it was impossible to 
preserve it, and that, if the leg were not cut off, the man 
must die within twenty-four hours ! It is probable that 
the time of Mr. Blundell was not, on this occasion, occu- 
pied more, altogether, than four days and four nights; 
yet, the effect was a great benefit to be enjoyed by Blake 
for probably thirty or forty years to come : and, while we 
must see that this benefit would necessarily extend itself 
to the whole of his numerous family, we must not over- 
look those feelings of pleasure which the cure would 
naturally produce amongst friends, acquaintances, and 
neighbors. 

The respect due to the profession of the surgeon or 
physician is, however, of an order inferior to that which 
is due to the profession of the law ; for whether in the 
character of counsellor or of judge, here are required, not 
only uncommon industry, labor, and talent, in the acquire- 
ment of knowledge ; but the application of this knowledge 
in defending the property of the feeble or incautious 
against the attacks of the strong and the wiles of the 
crafty, in affording protection to innocence and securing 
punishment to guilt, has, in the affairs of men and on 
their condition in life, a much more extensive and pow- 
erful influence than can possibly arise from the appli- 
cation of surgical or medical knowledge. 

To the functions of statesmen and legislators is due the 
highest respect which can be shown by man to anything 
human ; for, not only are the industry, labor, and talent 
requisite in the acquirement of knowledge, still greater 
and far greater here, than in the profession of the law ; 
but, of the application of this knowledge, the effects are 
so transcendent in point of magnitude as to place them 



4 Introduction. 

beyond all the bounds of comparison. Here it is not in- 
dividual persons with their families, friends, and neigh- 
bors that are affected ; but whole countries and communi- 
ties. Here the matters to be discussed and decided on 
are peace or war, and the liberty or slavery, happiness or 
misery, of nations. Here a single instance of neglect, a 
single oversight, a single error, may load with calamity 
millions of men, and entail that calamity on a long series 
of future generations. 

This is true enough ; but it is a remarkable fact that nearly all 
the efforts of legislators, political as well as ecclesiastical, have 
been of such a nature as to cause anything but respect for them. 
The historian Buckle shows that the great bulk of the enactments 
of legislators, since the beginning of history, have been conducive 
of results directly opposite to those for which they were intended ; 
that is, evil results ; and that the only beneficial legislation of mod- 
ern times has consisted in the undoing of what previous legislators 
have done. So that, of all the personages in history, none, unhap- 
pily, are deserving of more profound contempt, or, at least, of less 
esteem, than precisely those very men who ought to have secured 
the greatest esteem, legislators. And all this, not because they 
were bad men, but because they were lacking in knowledge. 

And if this is the case with law-makers of honest intentions, 
what shall we say of those execrable wretches, those deadly can- 
cers on the body politic, who, on becoming members of a legisla- 
ture, sell themselves, body and soul, to wealthy corporations? 
What shall we think of their influence on the progress and welfare 
of the people, whose interests they were elected to protect and to 
promote ? Such creatures lose not only the esteem of all honest 
men, but their own esteem, their self-esteem; they become con- 
temptible, not only in their own eyes, but in the eyes of those who 
buy them; and as to the future, the hottest, deepest gulfs in 
hell are yawning for them ! 

As a contrast to Buckle's judgment of the great crowd of igno- 
rant and consequently pernicious legislators, consider this remark- 
able statement which the same writer makes of the power and 
influence of one man of real knowledge : * ' Well may it be said of 
Adam Smith (author of * TJie Wealth of Nations '), and said too 
without fear of contradiction, that this solitary Scotchman has, by 
the publication of one single work, contributed more towards the 



Introduction. 5 

happiness of man, than has been effected by the united abilities of 
all the statesmen and legislators of whom history has preserved an 
authentic account." — Hist, of Civilization, Yol I., p. 155. 

But, my dear James, you will always bear in mind that 
as the degree and quality of our respect rise in proportion 
to the influence which the different branches of knowledge 
naturally have in the affairs and on the condition of men, 
so, in the cases of an imperfection in knowledge, or of 
neglect in its application, or of its perversion to bad pur- 
poses, all the feelings which are opposite to that of respect 
rise in the same proportion. To ignorant pretenders to 
surgery and medicine we award our contempt and scorn; 
on time-serving or treacherous counsellors, and on cruel 
or partial judges, we inflict our detestation and abhor- 
rence; while, on rapacious, corrupt, perfidious, or tyran- 
nical statesmen and legislators, the voice of human nature 
cries aloud for execration and vengeance. 

The particular path of knowledge to be pursued by you 
will be of your own choosing ; but, as to knowledge con- 
nected with books, there is a step to be taken before you 
can fairly enter upon any path. In the immense field of 
this kb*d of knowledge, innumerable are the paths, and 
Grammar is the gate of entrance to them all. And if 
grammar is so useful in the attaining of knowledge, it is 
absolutely necessary in order to enable the possessor to 
communicate, by writing, that knowledge to others, with- 
out which communication the possession must be com- 
paratively useless to himself in many cases, and, in almost 
all cases, to the rest of mankind. 

The actions of men proceed frOm their thoughts. In 
order to obtain the cooperation, the concurrence, or the 
consent, of others, we must communicate our thoughts to 
them. The means of this communication are words; and 
grammar teaches us how to make use of words. There- 
fore, in all the ranks, degrees, and situations of life, a 
knowledge of the principles and rules of grammar must 



6 Introduction. 

be useful; in some situations it must be necessary to 
the avoiding of really injurious errors; and in no sit- 
uation, which calls on man to place his thoughts upon 
paper, can the possession of it fail to be a source of self- 
gratulation, or the want of it a cause of mortification and 
sorrow. 

But, to the acquiring of this branch of knowledge, my 
dear son, there is one motive which, though it ought at 
all times, to be strongly felt, ought, at the present time, 
to be so felt in an extraordinary degree : I mean that de- 
sire which every man, and especially every young man, 
should entertain to be able to assert with effect the rights 
and liberties of his country. When you come to read the 
history of those laws of England by which the freedom 
of the people has been secured, and by which the happi- 
ness and power and glory of our famed and beloved coun- 
try have been so greatly promoted ; when you come to 
read the history of the struggles of our forefathers, by 
which those sacred laws have, from time to time, been 
defended against despotic ambition ; by which they have 
been restored to vigor when on the eve of perishing ; by 
which their violators have never failed, in the end, to be 
made to feel the just vengeance of the people ; when you 
come to read the history of these struggles in the cause 
of freedom, you will find that tyranny has no enemy so 
formidable as the pen. And, while you will see with exulta- 
tion the long-imprisoned, the heavily-fined, the banished 
William Prynne, returning to liberty, borne by the people 
from Southampton to London, over a road strewed with 
flowers ; then accusing, bringing to trial, and to the block, 
the tyrants from whose hands he and his country had un- 
justly and cruelly suffered; while your heart and the 
heart of every young man in the kingdom will bound with 
joy at the spectacle, you ought all to bear in mind that, 
without a knowledge of grammar, Mr. Prynne could never 
have performed any of those acts by which his name has 



Introduction. 7 

been thus preserved, and which have caused his memory 
to be held in honor. 

Though I have now said what, I am sure, will be more 
than sufficient to make you entertain a strong desire to 
take this first step in the road to literary knowledge. I 
cannot conclude this introductory letter without observ- 
ing, that you ought to proceed in your study, not only 
with diligence, but with patience; that, if you meet with 
difficulties, you should bear in mind that, to enjoy the 
noble prospect from Port's-Down Hill, you had first to 
chmb slowly to the top; and that, if those difficulties 
gather about you and impede your way, you have only to 
call to your recollection any one of the many days that 
you have toiled through briers and brambles and bogs, 
cheered and urged on by the hope of at last finding and 
killing your game. 

I have put my work into the form of Letters, in order 
that I might be continually reminded that I was address- 
ing myself to persons who needed to be spoken to with 
great clearness. I have numbered the Letters themselves, 
and also tike paragraphs, in order that I might be able, in 
some parts of the work, to refer you to, or tell you where 
to look at, other parts of the work. And here I will just 
add, that a sentence, used as a term in Grammar, means 
one of those portions of words which are divided from the 
rest by a single dot, which is called a period, or full point; 
and that a paragraph means one of those collections, or 
blocks, of sentences which are divided from the rest of the 
work by beginning a new line a little further in than the 
lines in general ; and, of course, all this part, which I have 
just now written, beginning with "I have put my work 
into the form" is a paragraph. 

In a confident reliance on your attentiveness, industry, 
and patience, I have a hope not less confident of seeing 
you a man of real learning, employing your time and 
talents in aiding the cause of truth and justice, in afford- 



8 Definition of 

ing protection to defenceless innocence, and in drawing 
down vengeance on lawless oppression ; and, in that hope, 
I am your happy, as well as affectionate, father, 

WILLIAM COBBETT. 



LETTER III 

DEFINITION OF GRAMMAR, AND OF ITS DIFFERENT BRANCHES, 
OR PARTS. 

My dear James: 

1. In the foregoing Letter I have laid before you some 
of the inducements to the study of Grammar. In this I 
will define, or describe, the thing called Grammar ; and 
also its different Branches, or Parts. 

2. Grammar, as I observed to you before, teaches us 
how to make use of words; that is to say, it teaches us how 
to make use of them in a proper manner, as I used to 
teach you how to sow and plant the beds in the garden ; 
for you could have thrown about seeds and stuck in 
plants of some sort or other, in some way or other, without 
any teaching of mine ; and so can anybody, without rules 
or instructions, put masses of words upon paper ; but to 
be able to choose the words which ought to be employed, 
and to place them where they ought to be placed, we must 
become acquainted with certain principles and rules; 
and these jDiinciples and rules constitute what is called 
Grammar. 

3. Nor must you suppose, by-and-by, when you come 
to read about Nouns and Verbs and JProyiouns, that all 
this tends to nothing but mere ornamental learning; that 
it is not altogether necessary, and that people may write 
to be understood very well without it. This is not the 
case ; for, without a good deal of knowledge relative to 
these same Xouns and Verbs, those who write are never 



Grammas and its Branches. 9 

sure that they put upon paper what they mean to put 
upon paj)er. I shall, before the close of these Letters, show 
you that even very learned men have frequently written, 
and caused to be published, not only what they did not 
mean, but the very contrary of what they meant ; and if 
errors, such as are here spoken of, are sometimes com- 
mitted by learned men, into what endless errors must 
those fall who have no knowledge of any principles or 
rules, by the observance of which the like may be avoided ! 
Grammar, perfectly understood, enables us not only to 
express our meaning fully and clearly, but so to express 
it as to enable us to defy the ingenuity of man to give to 
our words any other meaning than that which we ourselves 
intend them to express. This, therefore, is a science of 
substantial utility. 

4. As to the different Branches or Parts of Grammar, 
they are fo ur; and they are thus named: Orthography, 
Prosody, Etymology, and Syntax. 

5. There are two of these branches on which we have 
very little to say, and the names of which have been kept 
in use from an unwillingness to give up the practice of 
former times ; but, as it is usual to give them a place in 
books of this kind, I will explain to you the nature of all 
the four branches. 

6. OETHOGEAPHT is a word made up of two Greek 
words, which mean spelling. The use of foreign words, 
in this manner, was introduced at the tima when the 
English language was in a very barbarous Jtate; and, 
though this use has been continued, it ought to be a rule 
with you, always, when you either write or speak, to avoid 
the use of any foreign or uncommon word, if you can ex- 
press your meaning as fully and clearly by an English word 
in common use. However, Orthography means neither 
more nor less than the very humble business of putting 
letters together properly, so that they shall form icords. 
This is so very childish a concern that I will not appear to 

1* 



10 Definition of 

suppose it necessary for me to dwell upon it; but as yon 
will, by-and-by, meet with some directions, under the head 
of Etymology- in which Vowels and Consonant* will be 
spoken of, I will here, for form's sake, just observe thai 
the letters, A. E. L 0. and XT, are VoweU. T. in certain 
cases, is also a VoweL All the rest of the letters of the 
aL::mmf: arf C:-\-s: : .:: m 

Tim ■ ■ mry n-mmif ..msimsi " :: mfllim. I : — mm mm m: if 
passed over so lightly : for it is a subject of Terr great difficulty to 
many persons. It is notorious that many of oar ablest "RnoWaih 
authors were never able to spell or punctuate correctly, and that 

:lf c :rrf ::m~ :: :mir rrimf i i ::m. in :im rfmf ::. :? mrmir 

: ~m:m z '. .mm: : : :m c : mm si: ~. z. 5 : nif i ' - : ^ ^-- -.-----—•-- -- 

mim:. Lniffi. if "77 zz:~ ; : z.: r r i :: :m : mmmmmm :. 
Tom Hood's witty but illiterate correspondent, who, on writing 
him a long letter without any points whatever, jotted them all 
down in a row at the end of his letter, and told him to "pepper 
and salt " as he pleased. It is the compositor that does the " pep- 
i-frmz mi fmim " mi nm:i mm ::: m:m :■* "mimr :: mm 
pretensions. 

The orthography of our English words, from their various deri- 
vation and the variety of sounds given to the letters of the alpha. 
im. imm'm-mnmf iiimm mm mm :: im — iris :: .7:7 im: 
z::t" ::::::: mi I mm :: mimm imf :m mm "if?: mi 
smmm — m :: immim ::. •:::::7:nu :'m :-:i::::"::: :: :m 
sentences — I mean by dictations. It is not necessary to have a 
:m;mr ::r im z zzrz. : m mm : :> ~m :-ii rmi : :m: ::_- ;m im 
tate to you. All you have to do is to write down the words and 
points that are slowly read to you from a book, and when you 
have written about a page, take the printed book and compare 
7: zzz — :: Is mi :: mm mm m: s-f in im *:: : m. mi : ::n :: n: : mi- 
ingry. This is the cure for all spenlng-ref orm nonsense. Write 
page after page to dictation, and you will soon find it all come very 
mmmi— 7 m ~iil ~ mifr m — --^j'::-: Lj : : n: f mr :imk :: mm- 
im im — mis :'i::n^ :*_m :i: ~m mf7 .m smiim. ::!:-*- 
mm .'■. :.m~ if mfllfi mirrmm 

The old method — stiH practiced in our public schools — of giving 
m: ::imm :: mrif mi ;-:m:r-::is:: if 57 /im. mri m- 
and in writing, many of them such as may never be seen twice 
again in a lifetime, is of very little value; for it is disjointed, dry, 
mi mmm — mmrm ".7 :m:mim sm:mm i::n_ i i-; m. :_c 



Grammar and its Branches. 11 

scholar learns: 1st, to spell the words in common use; 2d, to 
spell words according to their meaning (there, their ; hair, hare ; 
pear, pair); 3d, to associate words with ideas, thus instinctively 
and imperceptibly learning their proper meaning and right use ; 
and, 4th, he acquires a feeling or taste for correct language ; words 
and sentences are impressed forcibly on his mind by hearing, 
seeing, and writing them. Besides, he learns in this way, better 
than in any other, a knowledge of punctuation, which in English 
is different with different writers ; in fact, every English writer 
has his own style of punctuating, for this is generally a matter of 
taste and feeling. In writing to dictation, the work done by the 
scholar is nearly the same as that done by the compositor, who is 
the best speller and punctuator in the world. Therefore, get 
somebody to dictate to you every day a page, or half a page, from 
a book, and you will, in a few months, acquire a better knowledge 
of orthography and punctuation than if you had spelled your way 
through a dozen spelling-books. 

7. PROSODY is a word taken from the Greek lan- 
guage, and it means not so much as is expressed by the 
more common word PRONUNCIATION ; that is to say, 
the business of using the proper sound, and employing 
the due length of time, in the uttering of syllables and 
words. This is a matter, however, which ought not to 
occupy much of your attention, because pronunciation is 
learned as birds learn to chirp and sing. In some counties 
of England many words are pronounced in a manner dif- 
ferent from that in which they are pronounced in other 
counties ; and between the pronunciation of Scotland and 
that of Hampshire the difference is very great indeed. 
But, while all inquiries into the causes of these differences 
are useless, and all attempts to remove them are vain, the 
differences are of very little real consequence. For in- 
stance, though the Scotch say coorn, the Londoner* cawn^ 
and the Hampshire folks earn, we know they all mean to 
say corn. Children will pronounce as their fathers and 
mothers pronounce; and if, in common conversation, or 
in speeches, the matter be good and judiciously arranged, 
the facts clearly stated, the arguments conclusive, the 



12 Definition of 

words well chosen and properly placed, hearers whose 
approbation is worth having will pay very little attention 
to the accent. In short, it is sense, and not sound, which 
is the object of your pursuit ; and, therefore, I have said 
enough about Prosody. 

Here is a circumstance that suggests a by no means unfavorable 
commentary on the difference between the pronunciation of Eng- 
lish in this country and in England : Mr. James Paul Cobbett, son 
of William Cobbett, has added to a late edition of this grammar, a 
sixteen-page chapter on pronunciation, pointing out the various 
classes of words commonly mispronounced by classes and counties 
of people in England. After carefully noting them all, I have come 
to the conclusion that the whole batch is utterly useless for our 
people, as I do not know of a single class of people in this country 
who make any one of the same mispronunciations. Many of the 
mistakes are, it is true, made here, too ; as, bood for bud ; doon 
for done ; aboove for above ; f ayther for father ; awch for arch ; 
glawss for glass ; but they are not made by classes of people ; they 
are, in fact, made by none but a few illiterate and pretentious 
people. 

The most common mistake made by people in this country con- 
sists in misplacing the accent of words ; as, in-dus'-try for indus- 
try ; in-ter-est'-ing for in'-ter-est-ing. All these may be corrected 
by reference to the dictionary, in which the pronunciation of every 
word is properly marked. The stress of the voice always falls on 
that syllable having the accent-mark (') ; thus, per'-emp-to-ry, not 
per-emp'to-ry. I have read somewhere that, on one occasion, 
when Mr. Sumner's colleague in the Senate said he hoped that the 
honorable gentlemen would make an inquiry into some matter, 
Mr. Sumner whispered to him : "inquiry." 

By-the-bye, there is one other mistake in pronunciation, which 
is very common among Americans, in the Eastern States at least, 
and that is pronouncing such words as new, dew, stew, as if they 
were written noo, doo, stoo. They must be pronounced like few 
and view. The same error is made in such words as duty, grati- 
tude, where the u must be long, as in useful. 

There is something else that usually comes under this heading. 
The Greek word prosodia means, literally, "belonging to song 
or hymn," and is usually employed to signify that part of gram- 
mar which treats of the rules of rhythm in metrical composi- 
tions. Cobbett, it is well known, had very little admiration for 



Grammar and its Branches. 13 

poetry, and no doubt considered it a waste of time to say anything 
about its laws ; but, though perhaps not one in a hundred of those 
who study this book will ever attempt to write poetry, every intel- 
ligent person ought to know something of its laws ; and I shall, 
therefore, at the end of the book, after more necessary mat- 
ters have been mastered, attempt to show what a simple matter 
this is, as far as English is concerned. 

8. ETYMOLOGY is a very different matter ; and, undei 
this head, you will enter on your study. This is a word 
which has been formed out of two Greek words ; and it 
means the pedigree or relationship of words, or, the man- 
ner in which one word grows out of, or comes from, 
another word. For instance, the word walk expresses an 
action, or movement, of our legs ; but, in some cases we 
say walks, in others walked, in others walking. These 
three latter words are all different from each other, and 
they all differ from the original word, v:alk; but the 
action or movement, expressed by each of the four, is 
precisely the same sort of action or movement, and the 
three latter words grow out of, or come from, the first. 
The words here mentioned differ from each other with 
regard to the letters of which they are composed. The 
difference is made in order to express differences as to the 
Persons who walk, as to the Number of persons, as to the 
Time of walking. You will come, by-and-by, to the prin- 
ciples and rules according to which the varying of the 
spelling of words is made to correspond with these and 
other differences; and these principles and rules consti- 
tute what is called Etymology. 

9. SYNTAX is a word which comes from the Greek. 
It means, in that language, the joining of several things 
together; and, as used by grammarians, it means those 
principles and rules which teach us how to put words 
together so as to form sentences. It means, in short, sen- 
tence-making. Having been taught by the rules of Ety- 
mology what are the relationships of words, how words 
grow out of each other, how they are varied in their 



14 Definition of Grammar ', etc. 

letters in order to correspond with the variation in the 
circumstances to which they apply, Syntax will teach you 
how to give all your words their proper situations or 
places, when you come to put them together into sen- 
tences. And here you will have to do with points as well 
as with words. The points are four in number, the 
Comma, the Semi- Colon, the Colon, and the Period. 
Besides these points, there are certain marks, such as the 
mark of interrogation, for instance; and to use these 
points and marks properly is, as you will by-and-by find, 
a matter of very great importance. 

10. I have now given you a description of Grammar, 
and of its separate Branches or Parts. I have shown you 
tha»t the first two of these Branches may be dismissed 
without any further notice ; but very different indeed is 
the case with regard to the latter two. Each of these 
will require several Letters ; and these Letters will contain 
matter which it will be impossible to understand without 
the greatest attention. You must read soberly and slowly, 
and you must think as you read. You must not hurry 
on from one Letter to another, as if you were reading a 
history ; but you must have patience to get, if possible, at 
a clear comprehension of one part of the subject before 
you proceed to another part. When I was studying the 
French language, the manner in which I proceeded was 
this: when I had attentively read over, three times, a 
lesson, or other division of my Grammar, I wrote the 
lesson down upon a loose sheet of paper. Then I read it 
again several times in my own hand-writing. Then I 
copied it, in a very plain hand, and without a blot, into a 
book, which I had made for the purpose. But if, in writ- 
ing my lesson down on a loose sheet of paper, I commit- 
ted one single error, however trifling, I used to tear the 
paper, and write the whole down again ; and, frequently, 
this occurred three or four times in the writing down of 
one lesson. I, at first, found this labor very irksome; 



Parts of Speech. 15 

but, having imposed it on myself as a duty, I faithfully 
discharged that duty ; and, long before I had proceeded 
half way through my Grammar, I experienced all the 
benefits of my industry and perseverance. 

This was, no doubt, how Cobbett, in his soldier days, learned to 
spell and punctuate ; for what he did was as good as writing so 
many dictations. If any scholar feels like following his example, 
he may lighten the labor and secure nearly equal benefit by writ- 
ing the lessons down as dictations. 



LETTEE III. 

ETYMOLOGY. 

The different Parts of Speech, or Sorts of Words. 
My deIr James: 

11. In the second Letter I have given you a description 
of Etymology, and shown you that it treats of the pedi- 
gree, or relationship, of words, of the nature of which re- 
lationship I have given you a specimen in the word walk. 
The next thing is to teach you the principles and rules, 
according to which the spelling and employing of words 
are varied in order to express the various circumstances 
attending this relationshijD. But, before I enter on this 
part of my instructions, I must inform you that there are 
several distinct sorts of words, or, as they are usually 
called, Parts of Speech/ and it will be necessary for you 
to be able, before you proceed further, to distinguish the 
words belonging to each of these Parts of Speech from 
those belonging to the other parts. There are Nine 
Parts of Speech, and they are named thus : 

ARTICLES, NOUNS, 

PRONOUNS, ADJECTIVES, 

VERBS, ADVERBS, 

PREPOSITIONS, CONJUNCTIONS, 
INTERJECTIONS. 



16 Etymology. 

12. Before the sergeant begins to teach young soldiers 
their exercise of the musket, he explains to them the dif- 
ferent parts of it; the butt, the stock, the barrel, the 
loops, the swivels, and so on ; because, unless they know 
these by their names, they cannot know how to obey his 
instructions in the handling of the musket. Sailors, for 
the same reason, are told which is the tiller, which are the 
yards, which the shrouds, which the tacks, which the 
sheets, which the booms, and which are each and every 
part of the ship. Apprentices are taught the names of all 
the tools used in their trade ; and ploughboys the names 
of the various implements of husbandly. This species of 
preliminary knowledge is absolutely necessary in all these 
callings of life ; but not more necessary than it is for you 
to learn, before you go any further, how to know the sorts 
of words one from another. To teach you this, therefore, 
is the object of the present letter. 

13. ABTICLES. There are but three in our language; 
and these are, the, an, and a. Indeed, there are but two, 
because an and a are the same word, the latter being 
only an abbreviation, or a shortening, of the former. I 
shall, by-and-by, give you rules for the using of these 
Articles ; but my business in this place is only to teach 
you how to know one sort of words from another sort of 
words. 

14. NOUNS. The word Noun means name, and 
nothing more ; and Nouns are the names of persons and 
things. As far as persons and other animals and things 
that we can see go, it is very easy to distinguish Nouns; 
but there are many Nouns which express what we can 
neither see, nor hear, nor touch. For example: Con- 
science, Vanity, Vice, Sobriety, Steadiness, Valour; and 
a great number of others. Grammarians, anxious to give 
some easy rule by which the scholar might distinguish 
Nouns from other words, have directed him to put the 
words, the good, before any word, and have told him that, 



Parts of Speech, 17 

if the three words make sense, the last word is a Noun. 
This is frequently the case ; as, the good house, the good 
dog; but the good sobriety would not appear to be very 
good sense. In fact there is no rule of this kind that will 
answer the purpose. You must employ your ?ni?id in 
order to arrive at the knowledge here desired. 

15. Every word which stands for a person or any ani- 
mal, or for any thing of substance, dead or alive, is a 
Noun. So far the matter is very easy. Thus, man, cat, 
tree, log, are Nouns. But when we come to the words 
which are the names of things, and which things are not 
substances, the matter is not so easy, and it requires a 
little sober thought. This word thought, for example, is 
a Noun. 

16. The only sure rule is this : that a word which stands 
for any thing that has an existence is a Noun. For ex- 
am pie: Pride, Folly, Thought, Misery, Truth, False- 
hood, Opinion, Sentiment. None of these have any sub- 
stance. Tou cannot see them, or touch them ; but they 
all have an existence. They all exist in the world; and, 
therefore, the words which represent them, or stand for 
them, are called Nouns. If you be still a little puzzled 
here, you must not be impatient. You will find the diffi- 
culty disappear in a short time, if you exert your powers 
of thinking. Ask yourself what existence means. You 
will find that the words, very, for, think, but, pretty, do 
not express any thing which has an existence, or a being; 
but that the words, motive, zeal, pity, kindness, do ex- 
press things which have a being, or existence. 

17. PKONOUNS. Words of this sort stand in the 
place of Nouns. Their name is from the Latin, and it 
means For-nouns, or For-names; that is to say, these 
words, called Pronouns, are used for, or instead of, Nouns. 
He, She, Her, Him, Who, for example, are Pronouns. 
The use of them is to prevent the repetition of Nouns, 
and to make speaking and writing more rapid and less 



18 Etymology. 

encumbered with words. An example will make this clear 
to you in a minute. Thus : 

18. A woman went to a man, and told him that he was 
in great danger of being murdered by a gang of robbers, 
who had made preparations for attacking him. He 
thanked her for her kindness, and, as he was unable to de- 
fend himself, he left his house and went to a neighbor's. 

19. Now, if there were no Pronouns, this sentence must 
be written as follows : — A woman went to a man, and told 
the man, that the man was in great danger of being mur- 
dered by a gang of robbers ; as a gang of robbers had 
made preparations for attacking the man. The man 
thanked the woman for the womaris kindness ; and as the 
man was unable to defend the maris self the man left 
the man's house and went to a neighbor's. 

20. There are several different classes of Pronouns; 
but of this, and of the manner of using Pronouns, you 
will be informed by-and-by. All that I aim at here is to 
enable you to form a clear idea with regard to the differ- 
ence in the sorts of words, or Parts of Speech. 

21. ADJECTIVES. The word Adjective, in its full, 
literal sense, means something added to something else. 
Therefore, this term is used in Grammar as the name of 
that Part of Speech which consists of words which are 
added, or put, to Nouns, in order to express something 
relating to the Nouns, which something could not be ex- 
pressed without the help of Adjectives. For instance, 
there are several turkeys in the yard, some black, some 
white, some speckled ; and, then, there are large ones and 
small ones of all the colours. I want you to go and catch 
a turkey; but I also want you to catch a white turkey, 
and not only a white turkey, but a large turkey. There- 
fore, I add, or put to the Noun, the words white and large, 
which, therefore, are called Adjectives. 

22. Adjectives sometimes express the qualities of the 
Nouns, to which they are put ; and this being very fre- 



Parts of Speech. 19 

quently their use, some grammarians have thrown aside 
the word Adjectives, and have called words of this sort, 
Qualities. But this name is not sufficiently comprehen- 
sive; for there are many words which are Adjectives 
which have nothing to do with the quality of the Nouns 
to which they are put. Good and bad express qualities, 
but long and short merely express dimension, or duration, 
without giving any intimation as to the quality of the 
things expressed by the Nouns to which they are put ; 
and yet long and short are Adjectives. You must read 
very attentively here, and consider soberly. You must 
keep in mind the above explanation of the meaning of the 
word Adjective; and if you also bear in mind that words 
of this sort always express some quality, some property, 
some appearance, or some distinctive circumstance, be- 
longing to the Nouns to which they are put, you will very 
easily, and in a very short space of time, be able to dis- 
tinguish an Adjective from words belonging to any other 
Part of Speech. 

23. VERBS. Grammarians appear to have been at a 
loss to discover a suitable appellation for this important 
sort of words, or Part of Speech; for the word Verb 
means nothing more than Word. In the Latin it is 
verbum, in the French it is verbe; and the French, in 
their Bible, say Le Verbe, where we say The Word. The 
truth is that there are so many properties and circum- 
stances, so many and such different powers and functions, 
belonging to this Part of Speech, that the mind of man is 
unable to bring the whole of them into any short and pre- 
cise description. The first grammar that I ever looked 
into told me that "a Verb is a word which signifies to do, 
to be, or to suffer." "What was I to understand from this 
laconic account ? 

24. Verbs express all the different actions and move- 
ments of all creatures and of all things, whether alive or 
dead. As, for instance, to speak, to bark, to grow, to 



20 Etymology. 

moulder, to crack, to crumble, and the like. In all these 
cases there is movement clearly understood. But in the 
cases of, to think, to reflect* to remember, to like, to detest, 
and in an infinite number of cases, the movement is not so 
easily perceived. Yet these are all Verbs, and they do 
indeed express movements which we attribute to the mind, 
or the heart. But what shall we say in the cases of to sit, 
to sleep, to rot, and the like? Still these are all Verbs. 

25. Verbs are. then, a sort of words, the use of which 
is to express the actions, the movements, and the state or 
manner of being, of all creatures and things, whether ani- 
mate or inanimate. In speaking with reference to a man, 
to fight is an action ; to reflect is a movement; to sit is a 
state of being. 

26. Of the manner of using Verbs you will hear a great 
deal by-and-by; but what I have here said will, if you 
read attentively, and take time to consider, be sufficient 
to enable you to distinguish Verbs from the words which 
belong to the other Parts of Speech. 

27. ADVERBS are so called because the words which 
belong to this Part of Speech are added to verbs. But 
this is an inadequate description ; for, as you will pres- 
ently see, they are sometimes otherwise employed. You 
have seen that Verbs express actions, movements, and 
states of being; and it is very frequently the use of Ad- 
verbs to express the manner of actions, movements, and 
states of being. Thus : the man fights bravely; he reflects 
profoundly ; he sits quietly. In these instances the Ad- 
verbs perform an office, and are placed in- a situation, 
which fully justify the name that has been given to this 
sort of words. But there are many Adverbs which do not 
express the manner of actions, movements, or states of 
being, and which are not added to verbs. For instance: 
" When you sow small seeds, make the earth very fine, 
and if it have, of late, been dry weather, take care to 
press the earth extremely hard upon the seeds." Here 



Parts of Speech. 21 

are four Adverbs, but only the last of the four expresses 
any thing connected with a verb. This shows that the 
name of this class of words does not fully convey to our 
minds a description of their use. 

28. However, with this aiame you must be content; 
but you must bear in mind that there are Adverbs of 
time, of place, and of degree, as well as of manner ; and 
that their business is to express, or describe, some circum- 
stances in addition to all that is expressed by the Nouns, 
Adjectives, and Verbs. In the above sentence, for ex- 
ample, the words when, very, of late, and extremely, add 
greatly to the precept, which, without them, would lose 
much of its force. 

29. PEEPOSITIONS. The Prepositions are, in, to, 
for, from, of, by, with, into, against, at, and several others. 
They are called Prepositions from two Latin words, mean- 
ing before and place; and this name is given them be- 
cause they are in most cases placed before Nouns and 
Pronouns ; as, " Indian corn is sown in May. In June, 
and the three following months, it is carefully cultivated. 
When ripe, in October, it is gathered in the field, by men 
who go from hill to hill with baskets, into which they put 
the ears. The leaves and stalks are then collected for 
winter use ; and they not only serve as food for cattle 
and sheep, but are excellent in the making of sheds to 
protect animals against the inclemency of the weather." 

30. Prepositions are not very numerous, and, though 
you will be taught to be very careful in using them, the 
above sentence will be quite sufficient to enable you to 
know the words belonging to this Part of Speech from 
the words belonging to any other Part of Speech. 

Notice that the word is from "prae," before, and "positio," 
a placing. Now take any article of furniture near you — the 
desk, for instance — and think of all the relations of position with 
regard to it and something else. The book is in the desk, on the 
desk, over the desk, above, under, beneath or below the desk, near 



22 Etymology. 

the desk, against the desk, beside the desk, within or without the 
desk, and so on. Still, other relations are sometimes expressed 
by prepositions as well as that of position ; as, by the desk, of the 
desk, to the desk, for the desk ; but the majority of them show 
some relation of position between things and actions, or between 
persons and actions, or between things and states. This word 
between, for instance, is a preposition. Like other words used in 
grammar, its name, preposition, does not express completely the true 
nature of it. 

31. CONJUNCTIONS axe so called because they con- 
join, ox join together, words, or parts of sentences; as, 
"Peas and beans maybe severed from the ground before 
they be quite dry ; but they must not be put into sacks or 
barns until perfectly dry, for, if they be, they will mould." 
The word and joins together the words peas and beans, 
and, by the means of this junction, makes all the remain- 
ing part of the sentence apply to both. The word but 
connects the first with the second member of the sen- 
tence. The word for, which is sometimes a Conjunction, 
performs, in this case, the same office as the word but: it 
continues the connection ; and thus does every part of the 
sentence apply to each of the two nouns which are the 
subject of it. 

What a deai of useless learning we find in the ordinary gram- 
mars about this simple matter of conjunctions! They speak of 
conjunctions which are mere connectives, of co-ordinate and sub- 
ordinate connectives, of copulative, adversative, and alternative 
conjunctions ; then of subordinate connectives which join hetero- 
geneous elements, and these subordinate connectives again divided 
into those which unite substantive clauses, those which unite 
adjective clauses, and those which unite adverbial clauses ! What 
are children to make of all these hard words ? Or, supposing they 
are made to understand the words, will it enable them to use the 
word and, for instance, more correctly by informing them that it 
is a copulative conjunction? 

32. INTEEJECTIONS. This name comes from two 
Latin words : inter, which means between, an&jectio, which 
means something thrown. So that the full, literal mean- 



Parts of Speech. 23 

ing of the word is something thrown between. The Inter- 
jections are Ah! Oh! Alas! and such like, which, in- 
deed, are not words, because they have no definite meaning. 
They are mere sounds, and they have been mentioned by 
me merely because other grammarians have considered 
them as being a Part of Speech. But this one notice of 
them will be quite sufficient. 

Here Cobbett's defective knowledge of Latin crops out, for jectio 
(jacio) does not mean something thrown, but merely to throw. But 
he is quite right in setting down interjections as forming no part 
of grammar. A writer in Chambers's Encyclopedia hits the mark 
still more effectively when he says that "they are, in fact, more 
akin to the sounds emitted by the lower animals than to articulate 
speech." Yet most grammarians take the trouble to set them 
down in classes, those that express surprise, those that express 
fear, and so on ; as if the veriest boor that ever hopped over a clod 
would not know how to utter an exclamation expressing fear or 
surprise when he felt it! It is something very much like the 
Irishman's " teaching ducks to swim." 

33. Thus, then, you are now able to distinguish, in 
many cases at least, to what Part of Speech belongs each 
of the several words which may come under your observa- 
tion. I shall now proceed to the Etymology of each of 
these Parts of Speech. As we have done with the Inter- 
jections, there will remain only eight Parts to treat of, 
and this I shall do in eight Letters, allotting one Letter 
to each Part of Speech. 

Here it seems proper to say to the thoughtful scholar that a word 
may (as remarked by Mr. White) belong to almost any part of 
speech, according to its use. We say dog is a noun ; and so it is 
when it means an animal of the dog species ; but it may be a verb 
or an adjective ; as, he will dog me to my home ; here is a dog cart. 
In this very phrase, "dog species," it is an adjective. Take, 
again, the word but. I will give it to you of four different parts 
of speech in four different senses. "I will go, but I will return. 
He is but five years old. The goat will but his head against you. 
He always has a but in his sayings." And the word could no 
doubt be used in still other parts of speech. If you cannot make 
these out now, wait a little ; you will be able to do so by-and-by. 



24 Etymology 

Spelled with two t's, there are three different butts, with three 
different meanings ; the butt of ridicule, the butt of a segar, the 
butt of wine. Then, again, a word may be of two different parts 
of speech with a different accent, as, I re-cord' the deed ; this is the 
rec'-ord. You see, therefore, every thing depends on the sense or 
the use made of a word ; and you see, too, the utter uselessness of 
learning by heart instead of by reason. In learning any art or 
science, an ounce of understanding is worth a ton of memory. 



LETTEE IV. 

etymology of articles. 

My dear James: 

34. In Letter III., paragraph 13, you have seen what 
sort of words Articles are ; that is feo say, you have there 
learned how to distinguish the words belonging to this 
Part of Speech from words belonging to other Parts of 
Speech. You must now turn to Letter II., paragraph 8. 
Having read what you find there under the head of Ety- 
mology, you will see at once, that my business, in this 
present Letter, is to teach you those principles and rules 
according to which Articles are varied in order to make 
them suit the different circumstances which they are used 
to express. 

35. Tou have seen that there are but three Articles, 
namely, A or AN, and THE. The two former are, in fact, 
the same tcord, but of this I shall say more presently. 
They are called indefinite Articles, because they do not 
define, or determine, what particular object is spoken of. 
The Nouns, to which they are prefixed, only serve to point 
out the sort of person or thing spoken of, without defin- 
ing what person or what thing ; as, a tree is blowed down. 
From this we learn that some tree is blowed down, but 
not what tree. But the definite Article THE determines 
the particular object of which we speak ; as, the tree which 



Of Articles: 25 

stood close beside the barn is blowed down. In this last 
instance, we are not only informed that a tree is blowed 
down, but the sentence also informs us what particular 
tree it is. This Article is used before nouns in the plural 
as well as before nouns in the singular number. It is 
sometimes used before words expressive of degrees of 
comparison ; as, the best, the worst, the highest, the loioest. 
When we use a noun in the singular number to express a 
whole species, or sort, we use the definite Article ; thus, 
we say, the oak is a fine tree, when we mean that oaks are 
fine trees. 

36. The Article A becomes AN when this Article comes 
immediately before any word which begins with a vowel. 
This is for the sake of the sound, as an adder, an elephant, 
an imh, an oily seed, an ugly hat. The word an is also 
used before words which begin with an h which is mute ; 
that is to say, which, though used in writing, is not 
sounded in speaking; as, an hour. This little variation in 
the article is, as I said before, for the sake of the sound ; 
for it would be very disagreeable to say, a adder, a ele- 
phant, a inch, a oily seed, a ugly hat, a hour, and the 
like. But a is used in the usual way before words which 
begin with an h which is sounded in speaking ; as, a horse, 
a hair, and the like. The indefinite Article can be used 
before nouns in the singular number only. There is a 
seeming exception to this rule in cases where the words 
few and many come before the noun; as, &few horses; a 
great ?na?iy horses ; but, in reality, this is not an excep- 
tion, because the words feio and many mean number ; 
thus, a small number of horses, a great number of horses ; 
and the indefinite Article agrees with this word number, 
which is understood, and which is in the singular. 

It is remarkable that a man of Cobbett's discernment did not see 

through a certain inconsistency in the strict or literal application 

of this rule, the more especially as he explicitly declares that the 

change is made for the sake of the sound. He, like a thousand 

2 



26 Etymology 

others to the present day, followed out the letter of the rule and 
violated its spirit. For a word may begin with a vowel and yet 
have a consonant sound; and in this case the article must not be 
changed. Does it not sound much better to say, " a useful book," 
than "an useful book?" "such a one," than "such an one?" And 
it will be seen that when we say a useful book, a one, a union, a 
ewe, a European, and the like, we really conform to the spirit of 
the rule ; for in all these cases the words begin with the SOUND 
of a consonant ; as, a yuseful book, a wone, a yunion, a yewe, a 
yeuropean. 

And this also clearly illustrates something else that has been left 
mysteriously indefinite in many grammars : " The vowels are a, e, 
' o, u, and sometimes w and #." What a puzzle this used to be to 
me in my grammar-studying days! There was the rule, plain 
enough; but when w and y were consonants, I knew no more 
than the man in the moon ! I suppose that these writers of gram- 
mars repeat this rule, one after another, without knowing anything 
about it themselves. Now the reason here given why the indefinite 
article must remain unchanged before words beginning with a 
vowel and having a y or w sound, explains the whole matter; 
namely, that y and w at the beginning of a syllable are consonants 
but in the middle or at the end of a syllable are vowels. In the 
word sympathy, for instance, both tfs are vowels, because they are 
equal to Vs; in the word yesterday, the first is a consonant, and the 
second a vowel. It is precisely the same with the w; in the words 
new, few, pew, the w's are vowels, being equal to u's; in the 
word window, the first is a consonant and the second a vowel. 

But there is another rule concerning words beginning with h, a 
rule of which Cobbett and many other writers of his day seem to 
have been unaware — although I have no doubt they unconsciously 
obeyed it — which is also formed for the sake of the sound. In these 
four words, for instance, history, historical, hero, heroic, the h is uni- 
formly sounded, or aspirated. Yet we say an historical fact, an 
heroic poem, a history, a hero. How does this come? It is because 
we must say an before words beginning with h aspirate, when the 
accent of such words falls on the second syllable. That is the rule. 
Say, therefore, an hotel, an hereditary prince, and not, as many do, 
a hotel, a hereditary prince; for the former sounds better. 

I may here add that the tendency now-a-dp ^ is to sound the h 
in some words in which it was formerly r ent : a humble man, 
a hospital, a hostler. I suppose Dickens' (Man Heep has made 
most people disgusted with "an 'umble aan." And it is perhaps 



Of JSTouns. 27 

worth remarking here that many Americans make a serious 
mistake when they believe that all Englishmen drop their aitches, 
and put them in where they ought not to do so. The latter is 
never done by anybody in England but illiterate Londoners, and 
the former seldom by Englishmen of any culture. 

I notice that recent grammarians follow Noah Webster in setting 
down articles as adjectives. It is true that these words always 
modify nouns in some way ; but I see no advantage in setting them 
down among a class of words which generally signify the kind or 
quality of things, thus rendering the adjective itself all the more 
difficult to define. Besides, the articles have* characteristics en- 
tirely their own, which can be remembered the better by keeping 
them apart. We shall see this more clearly by-and-by. 



LETTER V. 

ETYMOLOGY OF NOUNS. 

37. This, my dear James, is a Letter of great import- 
ance, and, therefore, it will require great attention from 
you. Before you proceed further, you will again look 
well at Letter II., paragraph 8, and Letter III., para- 
graphs 14, 15, and 16, and there read carefully everything 
under the head of N^ouns. 

38. Now, then, as Letter ILL has taught you how to 
distinguish Nouns from the words which belong to the 
other Parts of Speech, the business here is to teach you 
the principles and rules according to which Nouns are to 
be varied in the letters of which they are composed, ac- 
cording to which they are to be used, and according to 
which they are to be considered in their bearings upon 
other words in the sentences in which they are used. 

39. In a Noun there are to be considered the branches, 
the numbers, the genders, and the cases ; and all these 
must be attended to very carefully. 

40. THEBEANCHES. There are two ; for Nouns are 



28 Etymology 

some of thein proper and some common. A Noun is called 
proper when it is used to distinguish one particular indi- 
vidual from the rest of the individuals of the same species 
or kind; as James, Botley, Hampshire. The Noun is 
called common when it applies to all the individuals of a 
kind; as, man, village, county. Botley is a proper Noun, 
because all villages have not this name ; but village is a 
common noun, because all villages are called by that 
name: the name is common to them all. Several persons 
have the name of James, to be sure, and there is a Samp- 
shire in America as well as in England; but, still, these 
are proper names, because the former is not common to 
all men, nor the latter to all counties. Proper Nouns 
take no articles before them, because the extent of their 
meaning is clearly pointed out in the word itself, lnjig- 
nratice language, of which you will know more by-and-by, 
we sometimes, however, use the article ; as, " Goldsmith 
is a very pretty poet, but not to be compared to the Popes, 
the Drydens, or the Otways.'' And again; "I wish I had 
the wit of a Swift™ "We also use the definite article be- 
fore proper Nouns when a common Noun is understood 
to be left out; as. The Delaware, meaning the River Del- 
aware. Also when we speak of more than one person of 
the same name ; as, the Henries, the Edwards. 

A very important difference in the use of proper and 
common nouns is. that the former are written with a capital 
letter, and the latter are not. This is the general rule, and it is 
generally observed ; but some writers begin every word they think 
important with a capital letter, and nobody is more peculiar in 
this respect than Cobbett himself. He writes noun, you see, with 
a capital, although it is a common noun. Formerly every noun 
used to be written with a capital letter, as is done in German till 
this day. Thomas Carlyle is another singular punctuator and 
capitalize* ; but he is singular in all things. 

41. THE NUMBERS. These are the Singular and 
the Plural. The Singular is the original word; and, in 
general, the Plural is formed by adding an s to the singu- 



Of Nouns. 29 

lar, as dog, dogs. But though the greater part of our 
Nouns form their plurals from the singular in this simple 
manner, there are many which do not ; while there are 
some Nouns which have no plural number at all, and some 
which have no singular. Therefore, considering the above 
to be the First Rule, I shall add other rules with regard 
to the Nouns which do not follow that Rule. — The Second 
Rule. Nouns, the singular numbers of which end in ch, 
s, sh, or x, require es to be added in order to form their 
plural number; as, church, churches/ brush, brushes/ 
lass, lasses/ fox, foxes. — The Third Rule is that Nouns 
which end in y, when the y has a consonant coming im- 
mediately before it, change the y into ies in forming their 
plurals; as, quantity, quantities. But you must mind 
that if the y be not immediately preceded by a consonant, 
the words follow the First Hide, and take only an s in 
addition to their singular ; as, day, days. I am the more 
anxious to guard you against error as to this matter, be- 
cause it is very common to see men of high rank and pro- 
fession writing vallies, vollies, attornies, correspondencies, 
conveniencies, and the like, and yet all these are erroneous. 
Correspo?idence and inconvenience should have simply an 
s/ for they end in e, and not in y. — The Fourth Rule is, 
that Nouns which end in a single /, or in fe, form their 
rjlurals by changing the/, or/6, into ves / as, loaf, loaves/ 
wife, wives. But this rule has exceptions, in the following- 
words, which follow the First Bide : Dwarf, scarf mis- 
chief handkerchief chief relief grief and others. The 
two last are seldom used in the plural number ; but, as 
they sometimes are, I have included them. — The Fifth 
Rule is, that the following Nouns have their plural in en; 
man, men/ woman, women ; ox, oxen/ child, children. 
And brethren is sometimes used as the plural of brother. — . 
The Sixth Rule is, that all which nature, or art, or habit, 
has made plural, have no singular ; as, ashes, annals, bel- 
lows, bowels, thanks, breeches, entrails, lungs, scissors, 



30 



EtyrmAogy 



snuffers, tongs, wages, and some others. There are also 
some Nouns which have no plurals, such as those which 
express the qualities, or propensities, or feelings, of the 
mind or heart: as. honesty, meekness, compassion. There 
are. further, several names of herbs, metals, minerals, 
liquids, and of fleshy substances, which have no plurals ; 
to which may be added the names of almost all sorts of 
grain. There are exceptions here : for while wheat has 
no plural, oats has seldom any singular*. But all these 
words, and others which are irregular, in a similar way, 
are of such very common use that you will hardly ever 
make a mistake in applying them: for I will not suppose 
it possible for my dear James to fall into either the com- 
pany or the language of those who talk, and even write, 
about barleys, wheats, clovers, flours, grasses, and malts. 
There remain to be noticed, however, some words which are 
too irregular in the forming of their plurals to be brought 
under any distinct head even of irregularity. I will, 
therefore, insert these as thev are used in both numbers. 



srsGrxAB. 


PLTRAL. 


BoneuLAs. 


PLTEAL. 


Die, 


Dice. 


Goose, 


Geese. 


Mouse, 


Mice, 


Penny, 


Pence, 


Louse, 


Lice, 


Tooth, 


Teeth, 


Deer, 


Deer. 


Foot, 


Feet. 



Die. dice. This is the little cubic implement of the gamester ; 
but the more worthy implement of the die-sinker is regular: dk, 
die*. Tou must not confound this with the dye and dyes of the 
dyer. It is customary to change pen ny to pence when speaking :: 
a sum of money: but, in speaking of penny-pieces, the word is 
regular: as. I have a pocketful of pennies. By-the-bye, all - 
words as this word poov^/V arc also regular: three /'OS:?:/:, ."-5. : .:: 
spoonfuls, five shovelfuls. Three pocketsful would be quite 
thing. Then again. vr. r must, from the nature of the wo: - • 
mother 8-in-lmi:. GOfumns^german, awrts-martuU; for the words in-la\r. 
german, and martial, are adjectives or qualifying words, and 
adjectives, in English, never make any change to express number. 
Enc'.fihman and Fren<:\rnam become iT,\..\^- - . an:i Frr\r :-:-, : 



Of ISfoitns. 31 

but not all the nationalities ending in man become men; there are 
the Romans, the Normans, and the Germans, brave manly races, 
no doubt, but who will say that the Mussulmans, Turkomans 
and Ottomans deserve to be called men ? 

Most of the nouns ending in o, add es to form the plural ; as, 
negro, negroes. There are only a few exceptions; as, folio, 
quarto, duodecimo, piano, nuncio, cameo, which follow the general 
rule. I think it useless to mention every one of the excep- 
tions ; for, in the first place, usage is gradually changing the form 
of some of these words (motto, portico); and, in the second place, 
the reader can always, when necessary, find the desired informa- 
tion by reference to the dictionaiy. "I always did admire that 
speech!" were the sarcastic words of Mr. Butler in reply to one 
of Mr. Bingham's speeches. I may say the same thing, unsarcasti- 
cally, of the reply of a young candidate for the bar, who, on being 
asked some isolated, unimportant question, said, "I could find 
that out in two minutes by reference to an encyclopedia." 

There are some nouns, with a plural form but a singular mean- 
ing, that are always used in the singular. "The molasses is 
sticky. The measles is spreading. What is the news? He has 
made a series of blunders. The pains he has taken to repair them 
is remarkable. Mathematics (physics, optics, &c.) is an interesting- 
science." Look, therefore, to the meaning and not the form of the 
word. 

Deer, sheep, swine, vermin, are the same in both singular and 
plural; but snipe, trout, salmon, fish, and the like, become plural 
when number is signified, and singular when quantity is signified. 
"Here are two snipes ; I have shot a quantity of snipe. Here are 
three fishes, three salmons ; I have caught a lot of fish, of salmon." 
Dozen and_p«£> are used like hundred and thousand ; that is, singu- 
lar with any other number, but plural without any other number. 
"I saw dozens of those creatures ; they walked in pairs; I shot fi\ e 
dozen partridges and bought six pair of pigeons. Five hundred 
men; there were hundreds of men." 

In some compound nouns, both parts are made plural: man- 
servant, men-servants; woman-servant, women-servants; knight- 
templar, knights-templars. To prevent a confusion of things, we 
must add 's to figures and letters to indicate the plural: "I want 
three 5's and four 6's. Mind your p's and q's, and dot your i's." 
There are a number of names of persons and things in war affairs 
that do not make any change for the plural ; as, 
300 foot (meaning foot-soldiers, or infantry). 



32 Etym liogy 

400 horse (meaning horse-soldiers, or cavalry;. 

100 cannon ; although we also say, many cannons : a number 
of cannons. 

500 head (of cattle). 

40 yoke of oxen. 
sail (meaning ahi] 
This is a practice that seems to come from the German lang 1 .: . 
in which words of measure or quantity do not, generally, change 
to indicate plurality. Drei Pfund. zehn Fuss, vier Zoll. 

Among proper nouns, the only peculiarity is one concern 
the young ladies ; for in speaking of them, you may give their 
title or their name the sign of the plural : you may say, the Misses 
Campbell or the Miss Campbells, just as you please. The latte: 
I think, the more common usage, and the one that is like" 
prevail ; for it i3 more natural than the former, and prevents con- 
founding the young ladies with their mamma, Mrs. Campbell. 
(How is it, by-the-way, that most of the children in thi- 
say mam' ma and pap' a instead of mam-ma' and pa-pa\ which is the 
proper pronunciation?; In addressing people, in conversation 
say sir to one person, and gentlemen to several: rr. n 8o- 

and-So) to one, and ladies to several. Good morning, sir. Good 
morning, gentlemen. Good morning, miss or Miss Jennie). 
Good morning, ladies. And here let me throw in, without any 
extra charge, a bit of information for my young reader, which has 
something to do with politeness as well as with grammar: namely, 
that when you meet two persons in the street, only one of whom 
you know, it is proper for you to address both while sal a 
them : Good morning, gentlemen. 

Just as the girls get Miss, the boys ought to get Master. This, 
however, is more common in England than in this country. There 
the school-boy gets sounder floggings than he does here : but they 
don't rob him of his title: he i3 still Master Charles or Master 
Willie, even if he be flogged every day. 

42. THE GENDERS. In the French language, and 
many other languages, every Xoun is of the masculine or 
of the feminine gender. Hand, for instance, is of the 
feminine, and arm of the masculine ; pen of the feminine, 
endpaper of the masculine. This is not the case with our 
language, which, in this respect, has followed the order 
of nature. The names of ail males are of the masculine 



Of Nouns. S3 

gender; the names of all females are of the feminine gen- 
der ; and all other Nouns are of the neuter gender. And 
you must observe that, even in speaking of living crea- 
tures, of which we do not know the gender, we consider 
them to be of the neuter. In strictness of language, we 
could not, perhaps, apply the term gender to things desti- 
tute of all sexual properties ; but, as it is applied with 
perfect propriety in the case of males and females, and as 
the application in the case of inanimate or vegetable mat- 
ter can lead to no grammatical error, I have thought it 
best to follow, in this respect, the example of other gram- 
marians. It may be said that the rule which I have here 
laid down as being without any exception, has many ex- 
ceptions ; for that, in speaking of a ship, we say she and 
her. And you know our country folks in Hampshire call 
almost everything he or she. Sailors have, for ages, called 
their vessels shes, and it has been found easier to adopt 
than to eradicate the vulgarism, which is not only tolerated 
but cherished by that just admiration in which our country 
holds the species of skill and of valor to which it owes 
much of its greatness and renown. It is curious to ob- 
serve that country laborers give the feminine appellations 
to those things only which are more closely identified 
with themselves, and by the qualities and condition of 
which their own efforts and their character as workmen 
are affected. The mower calls his scythe a she/ the 
ploughman calls his plough a she; but a prong, or a 
shovel, or a harrow, which passes promiscuously from 
hand to hand, and which is appropriated to no particular 
laborer, is called a he. It was, doubtless, from this sort 
of habitual attachment that our famous maritime solecism 
arose. The deeds of laborers in the fields and of artizans 
in their shops are not of public interest sufficiently com- 
manding to enable them to break in upon the principles 
of language ; if they were, we should soon have as many hes 
and shes as the French, or any other nation in the world. 



34 Etymology 

43. While, however, I lay down this rule as required 
by strict grammatical correctness, I must not omit to 
observe that the license allowed to figurative language 
enables us to give the masculine or feminine gender to 
inanimate objects. This has justly been regarded as a 
great advantage in our language. We can, whenever 
our subject will justify it, transform into masculine, or 
into feminine, nouns which are, strictly speaking, neuter; 
and thus, by giving the functions of life to inanimate 
objects, enliven and elevate our style, and give to our 
expressions great additional dignity and force. 

This is the figure called personification, which may be illustrated 
by such examples as these: ' ; Grim-visaged War hath smoothed 
his wrinkled front." "Peace hath her victories no less renowned 
than War." "I care not. Fortune, what you me deny; you can- 
not rob me of free Nature's grace ; you cannot shut the win- 
dows of the sky, through which Aurora shows her brightening 
face." Notice that a noun personified is always spelled with a 
capital letter; and that the noun is made masculine or feminine 
according to its nature. 

Some grammarians speak of a fourth gender, the common 
gender. Nouns that are common to both genders, they call such; 
as, friend, parent, cook, slave. But there is really no necessity for 
such a distinction. When I speak of a friend, I certainly know 
whether that friend is man or woman, and it is very easy to let my 
hearer or reader know, too, if necessary. If I do not indicate it 
by the pronoun, my hearer or reader may assume that the friend is 
man or woman, as he thinks fit ; but he cannot think of him or 
her as both at once. Indeed the gender is usually indicated by the 
context ; that is, by the parts of the discourse preceding and suc- 
ceeding the word in question. I can hardly speak of a person 
without using he or she. The Germans generally add in to the 
masculine noun to make it feminine, as, Freund, Freundinn; the 
French generally add e to the masculine form; as, servant, 
servante ; and the only form in English that is regular is adding 
ess to the masculine, or changing its ending into ess; as, mayor, 
mayoress; hunter, huntress; actor, actress; count, countess; 
duke, duchess. As this, however, can be applied to but compar- 
atively few words in our language, we are obliged to make use 
of various expedients to indicate gender; as, dog-fox, bitch-fox; 



Of Nouns. 35 

cock-sparrow, hen-sparrow ; he-goat, she-goat; male cook, female 
cook. Generally, however, in speaking of animals, and also of 
infants, the distinction of sex is not observed ; that is to say, these 
are usually spoken of in the neuter gender. " What a handsome 
bird it is ! Look at that dog ! What a noble creature it is ! Did 
you see the baby? What an interesting child it is!" When we 
speak of any bird or animal distinguished for its boldness, size, or 
other quality peculiar to the male, we usually give it the masculine 
gender, even if its sex be not known. Such are, for instance, the 
horse or steed, the eagle, the condor, the mastiff, the St. Bernard 
or Newfoundland dog, and the like. Of course, all animals are 
personified in fables. 

As the words male and female carry a rather animalish significance 
with them, we sometimes say a lady-friend, a gentleman-rider, a 
hoy-singer. Somebody has observed that the words over the 
public-school entrances, ''Entrance for males," "Entrance for 
females," sound as if they were entrances for so many little he- 
bears and she-bears, and therefore prefers "Entrance for boys," 
"Entrance for girls." It is far better to speak, for instance, of a 
country being governed by a woman than by a female. 

44. THE CASES. The word case, as applied to the 
concerns of life, has a variety of meanings, or of different 
shades of meaning ; but its general meaning is state of 
things, or state of something. Thus we say, "In that 
case, I agree with you." Meaning, "that being the state 
of things, or that being the state of the matter, I agree 
with you." Lawyers are said " to make out their case ; 
or not to make out their case /" meaning the state of the 
matter which they have undertaken to prove. So, when 
we say that a horse is in good case, we mean that he is in 
a good state. Nouns may be in different states, or situa- 
tions, as to other Nouns, or other words. For instance, 
a Noun may be the name of a person who strikes a horse, 
or of a person who possesses a horse, or of a person whom 
a horse kicks. And these different situations, or states, 
are, therefore, called cases. 

45. You will not fully comprehend the use of these 
distinctions till you come to the Letter on Verbs ; but it 



36 Etymology 

is necessary to explain here the nature of these cases, in 
order that you may be prepared well for the use of the 
terms, when I come to speak of the Verbs. In the Latin 
language each Noun has several different endings, in 
order to denote the different cases in which it may be. 
In our language there is but one of the cases of Nouns 
which is expressed or denoted by a change in the ending 
of the Noun ; and of this change I will speak presently. 

46. There are three Cases : the Nominative, the Pos- 
sessive, and the Objective. A Noun is in the Nominative 
case when it denotes a person, or thing, which does some- 
thing or is something; as, Richard strikes ; Richard is 
good. 

47. A Noun is in the Possessive case when it names a 
person or thing that possesses some other person or 
thing, or when there is one of the persons or things be- 
longing to the other; as, Richards hat ; the mountains 
top ; the nations fleet. Here Richard, mountain, and 
nation, are in the vossessive case, because they denote 
persons or things which possess other ^persons or things, 
or have other persons or things belonging to them. 
And here is that change in the ending of the Noun, of 
which I spoke above. You see that Richard, mountain, 
nation, has, each of them, an s added to it, and a mark of 
elision over ; that is to say, a comma, placed above the 
line, between the last letter of the word and the s. This 
is done for the purpose of distinguishing this case from 
the plural number ; or, at least, it answers the purpose in 
all cases where the plural of the Noun would end in an 
s ; though there are different opinions as to the origin of 
its use. In Nouns which do not end their plural in s, the 
mark of elision would not appeal' to be absolutely neces- 
sary. We might write mans mind, icomans heart, but it 
is best to use the niark of elision. "When plural Nouns 
end with s, you must not add an s to form the possessive 
case, but put the elision mark only after the s which ends 



Of Nouns. 37 

the Noun; as, mountains' tops; nations' fleets; lasses' 
charms. Observe, however, that, in every instance, the 
possessive case may be expressed by a turn of the words ; 
as, the hat of Richard ; the top of the mountain ; the 
fleet of the nation ; the mind of man; and so on. The 
Nouns, notwithstanding this turn of the words, are still 
in the possessive case ; and, as to when one mode of 
expression is best, and when the other, it is a matter 
which must be left to taste. 

48. A noun is in the Objective case when the person or 
thing that it names or denotes is the object or end of 
some act or of some movement, of some kind or other; 
Eichard strikes Peter; Richard gave a blow to Peter ; 
Richard goes after Peter ; Richard hates Peter ; Richard 
loants arms ; Richard seeks after fame ; falsehood leads 
to mischief; oppression produces resistance. Here you 
see that all these Nouns in the objective case are the 
object, the end, or the effect, of something done or felt by 
some person or thing, and which other person or thing is 
in the nominative case. 

That is to say, a noun is alawys the object of one of two things, 
a transitive verb or a preposition. I don't think there is anything 
that enables one to understand this matter of case so well as a proper 
comprehension of the difference between the transitive and the in- 
transitive verb. I know I never understood it until I learned what 
a transitive verb was. — We have seen that verbs are words express- 
ing action or a state of being. Now watch. " I walk in the field ; 
I run every day ; I dream very often ; I live in Hoboken." Here the 
verbs walk, run, dream, live, express an action which does not pass 
from the actor or subject ; it is confined to him ; does not pass 
over to any thing; it is therefore intransitive. "I walk a horse; 
I run a grist-mill; I dream bad dreams; I live the lie down." Here 
the action passes from the actor to something else; \tgoes over to some- 
thing; the verb is, therefore, transitive. Now wherever this is the 
case, wherever the action passes to some object, that object or thing 
or noun is in the objective case. Again : " The boy is choking" — 
"the boy is choking the cat." In the first instance, the verb is 
intransitive; in the second, it is transitive, and "cat" is cons^- 



38 Etymology 

quently in the objective case. Besides the transitive verb, there 
is, as I have said, only one other thing that can put a noun in the 
objective case, and that is the preposition, which always governs the 
objective case, or puts whatever thing follows it in the objective 
case. You notice this in the above examples of Cobbett's ; the 
noun each time comes after a transitive verb or a preposition. In 
the examples I gave you with the desk (Letter III, par. 29), that 
word is invariably in the objective case. As to the nominative 
case (the subject), the name of the person or thing that does, is, or 
suffers something is in that case. Notice that a noun following 
the verb to be is always in the nominative case. The Germans, in 
their expressive language, call these three cases the icho-case, the 
w7wse-case, and the icliom-case. Just try this, and you will see that 
the nominative answers to Who? the possessive to Whose? and the 
objective to Whom? 



LETTER VI. 

etymology of pkonouns. 

My dear James : 

49. You will now refer to paragraphs 17, 18, and 19, in 
Letter III ; which paragraphs will refresh your memory 
as to the general nature and use of Pronouns. Then, in 
proceeding to become well acquainted with this Part of 
Speech, you will first observe that there, are four classes, 
or descriptions, of Pronouns : first, the Personal; second, 
the Relative; third, the Demonstrative; and, fourth, the 
Indefinite. 

50. In PERSONAL PRONOUNS there are four 
things to be considered: the person, the number, the 
gender, and the case. 

51. There are three persons. The Pronoun which 
represents, or stands in the place of, the name of the per- 
son who speaks, is called the first person; that which 
stands in the place of the name of the person who is 
spoken to, is called the second person ; that which stands 



Of Pronouns, 39 

in the place of the name of the person who is spoken of, 
is called the third person. For example : " I am asking 
you about him.''' This circumstance of person you will 
by-and-by find to be of great moment ; because, as you 
will see, the verbs vary their endings sometimes to corre- 
spond with the person of the Pronoun; and, therefore 
you ought to pay strict attention to it at the outset. 

52. The number is either singular or plural, and the 
Pronouns vary their spelling to express a difference of 
number; as in this table, which shows, at once, all the 
persons and all the numbers. 





SINGULAR. 


PLtFBAl, 


First person 


I, 


We. 


Second person 


Thou, 


You. 


Third person 


He, 


They. 



53. The next thing is the gender. The Pronouns of 
the first and second person have no changes to express 
gender; but the third person singular has changes for 
that purpose: he, she, or it; and I need not point out 
to you the cases where ene of these ought to be used 
instead of the other. 

54. The case is the last thing to be considered in per- 
sonal Pronouns. The meaning of the word case, as used 
in the rules of Grammar, I have fully explained to you in 
Letter V, paragraph 44. In paragraphs 45, 46, 47, and 
48, in the same Letter, I have treated of the distinction 
between the cases. Eead all those paragraphs again 
before you proceed further : for now you will find their 
meaning more clearly explained to you ; because the per- 
sonal Pronouns, and also some of the other Pronouns, 
have different endings, or are composed of different let- 
ters, in order to point out the different cases in which 
they are : as, he, his, him. 

55. The personal Pronouns have, like the nouns, three 
cases : the Nominative, the Possessive, and the Objective. 



40 



Etymology 



The following table exhibits the whole of them at one 
view, with all the circumstances of person, number, 
gender, and case. 



First Person 



SINGULAR NUMBER. 

Nominative. Possessive. 

r ; M ?> 



Second Person Thou, 

Masc. Gen. He, 
Femin. " She, 
Neuter u It, 



Third 
Pers. 



Mine, 

{Thy, 
) Thine, 
His, 
Her, 
Hers, 
Its, 



PLURAL NUMBER. 



First Person 



Nominative. 
We, 



Second Person 

Masc. Gen. 



You, 



Possessive. 
S Our, 
i Ours, 

\ Your, 
) Yours, 



Third 
Pers. 



Their, 
Theirs, 



Objective. 
Me. 

Thee. 
Him. 
Her. 
It. 

Objective. 

Us. 

You. 



Them. 



They, 
Femin. " They, 
Neuter " They, / 

56. Upon this table there are some remarks to be 
attended to. In the possessive cases of I, Thou, She, 
We, You, and They, there are two different words : as, 
My, or Mine ; but you know that the former is used 
when followed by the name of the person or thing pos- 
sessed ; and that the latter is used when not so followed ; 
as, " This is my pen ; this pen is mine" And it is the 
same with regard to the possessive cases of Thou, She, 
We, You, and They. 



Of Pronouns. 41 

The same grammarians that wish to call every word that stands 
before a noun an adjective, call these words, my, thy, his, your r 
their, possessive adjectives ; they call them such when coming di- 
rectly before a noun, and pronouns when standing alone. I know 
no change more utterly useless and confusing. Do they not always 
stand in the place of nouns in the possessive case ? "I met Tom 
Jones, and gave' him a message from his father." Does this his 
not stand for Tom's, a noun in the possessive case ? When Billy 
Clutterbuck says, "This is my dog," does it not mean, This is 
Billy Clutterbuck's dog? 

57. Thou is here given as the second person singular; 
but common custom has set aside the rules of Grammar 
in this case ; and though we, in particular cases, still 
make use of Thou and Thee, we generally make use of 
You instead of either of them. According to ancient rule 
and custom this is not correct ; but what a whole people 
adopts and universally practises must, in such cases, be 
deemed correct, and to be a superseding of ancient rulo 
and custom. 

58. Instead of you the ancient practice was to put ye 
in the nominative case of the second parson plural ; but 
this practice is now laid aside, except in cases which very 
seldom occur ; but whenever ye is made use of, it must 
be in the nominative, and never in the objective, case. I 
may, speaking to several persons, say, " Ye have injured 
me," but not "I have injured ye" 

There is nothing that more strikingly displays the spirit of caste 
in Germany than the fact that there are four different ways in 
German of saying you, according to the rank or social position of 
the person addressed (Sie, du, ihr. er). In English, we say you 
to the President, and you to a beggar; you to a king, and you to an 
assemblage of kings ; and this is characteristic of the sturdy love of 
Mr play (a word for which there is no proper equivalent in Ger- 
man) among the English race. Among German students, there 
are only two classes worthy of respect; those that are students, and 
those that have been students ; all the rest are cattle. — Ye is never 
used now except in the solemn style, nominative plural : O ye boys 
cf America, beware of the cheap story-papers, and the cheap and 



42 Etymology 

nasty story-books, for they carry the seeds of a disease that kill soul 
and body, something far worse than small-pox or yellow-fever ! 

It is a remarkable fact that many of our obsolete expressions are 
retained for the solemn style. Thou, thy, thee are now used in 
prayer, and in solemn compositions, such as Coleridge's Hymn to 
Mont Blanc, or Milton's Paradise Lost. 

<* 

59. The words self and selves are sometimes added to 
the personal Pronouns ; as myself thyself himself; but, 
as these compounded words are liable to no variations 
that can possibly lead to error, it will be useless to do any 
thing further than just to notice them. 

60. The Pronoun it, though a personal Pronoun, does 
not always stand for, or at least appear to stand for, any 
noun whatever ; but is used in order to point out a state 
of things, or the cause of something produced. For 
instance: "It freezed hard last night, and 2>was so cold, 
that it was with great difficulty the travellers kept on 
their journey." Now, what was it that freezed so hard? 
Not the frost / because the frost is the effect, and not the 
cause of freezing. We cannot say that it was the weather 
that freezed ; because the freezing constituted in part the 
weather itself. No ; the Pronoun it stands, in this place, 
for state of things, or circumstances / and this sentence 
might be written thus : " The freezing was so hard last 
night, and the cold was so severe, that the travellers 
found great difficulty in keeping on their journey. " Let 
us take another example or two : " It is a frost this morn- 
ing. It will rain to-night. It will be fine to-morrow." 
That is to say, "A state of things called frost exists this 
morning ; a state of things called rain will exist to-night ; 
and to-morrow a state of things called fine weather." 
Another example : " It is delightful to see brothers and 
sisters living in uninterrupted love to the end of their 
days." That is to say, " The state of things which ex- 
hibits brothers and sisters living in uninterrupted love to 
the end of their days is delightful to see." The Pronoun 



Of Pronouns. 43 

it is, in this its impersonal capacity, used in a great 
variety of instances ; but I forbear to extend my remarks 
on the subject here; because those remarks will find a 
more suitable place when I come to another part of my 
instructions. I have said enough here to prevent the 
puzzling that might have arisen from your perceiving that 
the Pronoun it was sometimes used without your being 
able to trace its connection with any noun either expressed 
or understood 

61. In order, however, further to illustrate this matter 
in this place, I will make a remark or two upon the use 
of the word there. Example : " There are many men, who 
have been at Latin schools for years, and who, at last, 
cannot write six sentences in English correctly, 1 ' Now, 
you know, the word there, in its usual sense, has reference 
to place ; yet it has no such reference here. The mean- 
ing is that " Many men are in existence who have been at 
Latin schools." Again : " There never was any thing so 
beautiful as that flower.'' That is to say, "Any thing so 
beautiful as that flower never existed, or never was in 
being" 

It may, perhaps, be useful for you to know (especially if you 
intend to pass an examination) that the word there in the sentences 
here given is called an expletive, which means a word used merely 
to fill up a vacancy. You can always leave it out without altering 
the sense. " There is a tree in the garden " is nothing but " a tree 
is in the garden." And you will now, perhaps, be better able to 
understand Pope's satirical lines on the works of poor authors : 

1 ' While expletives their feeble aid do join, 
And ten slow words oft creep in one dull line." 

62. We now come to the EELATIVE PEONOUNS, of 
which class there are only three; namely, Who, Which, 
and That. The two latter always remain the same, 
through all numbers, genders, and cases ; but the Pro- 
noun who changes its endings in order to express the 
possessive and objective cases ; as, who, whose, whom. 



44 Etymology 

63. These Pronouns are called relative, because they 
always relate directly to some noun or some personal 
Pronoun, or to some combination of words, which is 
called the antecedent ; that is to say, the person or thing 
going before. Thus : " The soldier %oho was killed at the 
siege." Soldier is the antecedent. Again: "The men, if 
I am rightly informed, who came hither last night, toho 
went away this morning, tahose money you have received, 
and to whom you gave a receipt, are natives of South 
America." Men is here the antecedent; and in this 
sentence there are all the variations to which this Pro- 
noun is liable. 

64. Who, whose, and whom cannot be used correctly 
as relatives to any Nouns or Pronouns which do not re- 
present men, women, or children. It is not correct to 
say, the horse, or the dog, or the tree, who was so and so ; 
or to whom was done this or that ; or whose color, or 
any thing else, was such or such. But the word That, as 
a relative Pronoun, may be applied to nouns of all sorts ; 
as, the boy that ran ; the horse that galloped ; the tree 
that was blowed down. 

The real reason for this use of the word that, however, is be- 
cause we must sometimes find a pronoun that will stand for both 
men and animals together : ' ' The horses and the riders that we saw 
are the favorites." And concerning the pronoun who, a change 
has taken place since Cobbett's time : we can now use it in the 
possessive case (whose) with reference to things as well as per- 
sons. "The mountain whose top is covered with snow," is con- 
sidered easier and more elegant than ' ' The mountain the top of 
which is covered with snow." The poets began to use this form, 
and prose-writers now use it too. By-the-way, you will notice that 
Cobbett is a little peculiar in using some irregular verbs in the 
regular form ; as, blowed and froze for blown and froze. More of 
this farther on. 

65. Which, as a relative Pronoun, is confined to irra- 
tional creatures, and here it may be used as a relative in- 
differently with that; as, the horse which galloped; the 



Of Pronouns. 45 

tree which was blowed down. This application of the 
relative xohich solely to irrational creatures is, however, 
of modern date ; for, in the Lord's Prayer, in the English 
Church Service, we say, " Our Father tchich art in heaven." 
In the American Liturgy this error has been corrected ; 
and they say, " Out' Father who art in heaven." 

66. I cannot, even for the present, quit these relative 
Pronouns without observing to you that they are words 
of vast importance, and that more errors, and errors of 
greater consequence, arise from a misapplication of them 
than from the misapplication of almost all the other 
classes of words put together. The reason is this, they 
are relatives, and they frequently stand as the repre- 
sentatives of that which has gone before, and which 
stands in a distant part of the sentence. This will be 
more fully explained when I come to the Syntax of 
Pronouns; but the matter is of such great moment 
that I could not refrain from giving you an intimation 
of it here. 

67. The DEMONSTEATIVE PKONOTJNS are so called 
because they more particularly mark or demonstrate the 
nouns before which they are placed, or for which they 
sometimes stand. They are, This, These, That, Those, 
and What. The use of them is so well known, and is 
liable to so little error, that my chief object in giving 
them this separate place is to show you the difference be- 
tween Thai, when a relative, and when not a relative. 
Take an example : " That man is not the man, as far as I 
am able to discover, that came hither last night." The 
first of these Thais does not relate to the man ; it merely 
points him out ; but the latter relates to him, carries you 
back to him, and supplies the place of repetition. This 
same word, That, is sometimes a Conjunction; as, " That 
man is not the man, as far as I can discover, that came 
hither last night, and that was so ill that he could hardly 
walk." The relative is repeated in the third That; but 



46 Etymology 

the fourth 27iat is merely a conjunction serving to con- 
nect the effect of the illness with the cause. 

"I say that that that that that author uses is false." Try and 
discover the four different parts of speech represented by the word 
that in this sentence. — This, that, and their plural, these, those, are, 
like the articles, called limiting adjectives when used directly be- 
fore nouns; this hat, these hats. When used with reference to 
things pointed at, these refers to things nearer at hand than those. 

68. Perhaps a profound examination of the matter 
would lead to a proof of That being always a Pronoun; 
but, as such examination would be more curious than use- 
ful, I shall content myself with having clearly shown you 
the difference in its offices, as a relative, as a demonstra- 
tive, and as a conjunction. 

69. What, together with who, whose, whom, and which, 
are employed in asking questions ; and are sometimes 
ranged under a separate head, and called Interrogative 
Pronouns. I have thought this unnecessary ; but here is 
an observation of importance to attend to; for which, 
though as a relative it cannot be applied to the intellectual 
species, is, as an interrogative, properly applied to that 
species; as, " Which man was it who spoke to youf 

70. What sometimes stands for both noun and relative 
Pronoun; as, " What I want is well known." That is to 
say, " The thing which I want is well known." Indeed, 
what has, in all cases, this extended signification; for 
when, in the way of inquiry as to words which we have 
not clearly understood, we say, What? our full meaning 
is, "Repeat to us that which you have said," or, "the 
words which you have spoken." 

In this sentence, "I gave him what (that which) he wanted," 
what is a relative pronoun ; but in this sentence, " I gave him what 
funds he wanted," it is an adjective. Notice that we always say 
that, never what, after every thing, any thing, nothing, something, 
all things. 

71. The INDETERMINATE PRONOUNS are so called 



Of Adjectives. 47 

because they express their objects in a general and inde- 
terminate manner. Several of them are also adjectives. 
It is only where they are employed alone, that is to say, 
without nouns, that they ought to be regarded as Pro- 
nouns. For instance : " One is always hearing of the un- 
happiness of one person or another? The first of these 
ones is a Pronoun; the last is an Adjective, as is also the 
word another / for a noun is understood to follow, though 
it is not expressed. > These pronouns are as follows : One, 
any, each, none, some, other, every, either, many, whoever, 
whatever, neither, and some few others, but all of them 
words invariable in their orthography, and all of very 
common use. 



LETTER VII. 

etymology of adjectives. 
My dear James: 

72. In Letter HE, paragraph 21, I have described what 
an Adjective is. You will, therefore, now read that para- 
graph carefully over, before we proceed in studying the 
contents of the present Letter. 

73. The Adjectives have no changes to express gender 
or case ; but they have changes to express degrees of com- 
parison. As Adjectives describe the qualities and proper- 
ties of nouns, and as these may be possessed in a degree 
higher in one case than in another case, such words have 
degrees of comparison; that is to say, changes in their 
endings, to suit these varying circumstances. A tree may 
be high, but another may be higher, and a third may be 
the highest. Adjectives have, then, these three degrees: 
the first degree, or rather, the primitive word, called 
the Positive ; the second, the Comparative ; the third, 
the Superlative. For the forming of these degrees I shall 



48 Etymology 

give you four rules; and if you pay strict attention to 
these rules, you will need to be told very little more about 
this Part of Speech. 

74. First Rule. Adjectives in general, which end in a 
consonant, form their comparative degree by adding er to 
the positive, and form their superlative degree by adding 
est to the positive ; as, 

POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 

Rich, Richer, Richest. 

75. Second Rule. Adjectives, which end in e, add, in 
forming their comparative, only an r, and in forming their 
superlative, st ; as, 

POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 

Wise, Wiser, Wisest. 

76. Third Rule. When the positive ends in c?, g, or t, 
and when these consonants are, at the same time, preceded 
by a single voicel, the consonant is doubled in forming 
the comparative and superlative ; as, 



POSITIVE. 


OOMPARATIYE. 


SUPERLATIVE, 


Red, 


Redder, 


Reddest. 


Big, 


Bigger, 


Biggest. 


Hot, 


Hotter, 


Hottest. 



But, if the d, g, or t, be preceded by another consonant, 
or by more than one vowel, the final consonant is not 
doubled in the forming of the two latter degrees ; as, 

POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 

Kind, Kinder, Kindest. 

Neat, Neater, Neatest. 

77. Fourth Rule. When the positive ends in y, pre- 
ceded by a consonant, the y changes into ie in the other 
degrees. 

POSITIVE. COMPARATIVE. SUPERLATIVE. 

Lovely, Lovelier, Loveliest. 

Pretty, Prettier, Prettiest. 



Of Adjectives. 49 

78. There are some Adjectives which can be reduced to 
no rule, and which must be considered as irregular ; as, 



POSITIVE, 


OOMPAEATIYE. 


SUPEELATIYE, 


Good, 


Better, 


Best. 


Bad, 


Worse, 


Worst. 


Little, 


Less, 


Least. 


Much, 


More, 


Most. 



79. Some Adjectives can have no degrees of comparison, 
because their signification admits of no augmentation ; as, 
all, each, every, any, several, some; and all the numerical 
Adjectives; as, one, two, three; first, second, third. 

But there are some other adjectives that do not admit of com- 
parison. Consider, for a moment, such words as true, round, 
square, perfect, dead. Properly speaking, nothing can be truer, 
rounder, squarer, more perfect, or deader than another; yet, in 
popular speech, these words are often used in the comparative or 
superlative degree. How often we hear people say, " I never saw 
any thing more perfect;" "this figure is not quite so round as 
that;" and the like. I do not mean to say that such expressions 
are absolutely unpermissible ; only that they are not strictly cor- 
rect. To say "more nearly round" or "more nearly perfect" 
would be more nearly correct. These expressions, however, occur 
in the rapid flow of conversation, and perhaps express the idea 
intended better than a more correct (notice these very words) or 
more choice expression. Editors sometimes speak of a political 
question as ' ' the deadest of all dead issues ;" which is very forcible 
language; and there is a comparison implied in the familiar ex- 
pressions, "dead as a door-nail; dead as Julius Caesar."— I may 
here mention that the word old, in its regular form, old, older, oldest, 
is used with reference to persons and things in general ; while the 
forms, elder, eldest, is used to distinguish kinsfolk or historical 
personages : my elder brother or nephew, my eldest sister or 
cousin; the elder Pliny, the elder Brutus, the elder or younger 
Pitt. 

Far, farther, farthest are used exclusively with reference to dis- 
tance; but we sometimes use the form further, to indicate some- 
thing more, or to point out that we have something more to say on 
a subject. The latter form is also sometimes used as an adjective \ 
have you any further objection? 

3 



50 Etymology 

80. Adjectives which end in most are superlative, and 
admit of no change ; as, utmost, uppermost, innermost. 

81. However, you will observe that all Adjectives which 
admit of comparison may form their degrees by the use 
of the words more and most; as, 



POSITIVE. 


COMPARATIVE. 


SUPERLATIVE. 


Rich, 


More rich, 


Most rich. 


Tender, 


More tender, 


Most tender. 



When the positive contains but one syllable, the degrees 
are usually formed by adding to the positive according to 
the four rules. When the positive contains tico syllables, 
it is a matter of taste which method you shall use in 
forming the degrees. The ear is, in this case, the best 
guide. But when the positive contains more than tico 
syllables, the degrees must be formed by the use of more 
and most. We may say tender and tender est, pleasanter 
and pleasantest, prettier and prettiest; but who could tol- 
erate delicater and delicatestf 

Nobody but Thomas Carlyle, who uses beautifulest, iconderfulest, 
and the like. To use another of Carlyle's Germanisms, there is no 
question but this usage is unriglit. 



LETTER VIII. 
etymology of verbs. 
My dear James: 

82. The first thing you have to do in beginning your 
study, as to this important Part of Speech, is to read 
again very slowly and carefully paragraphs 23, 24, 25, 
and 26, in Letter III. Having, by well attending to what 
is said in those paragraphs, learned to distinguish Verbs 
from the words belonging to other Parts of Speech, you 
will now enter, with a clear head, on an inquiry into the 



Of Verbs. 51 

variations to which the words of this Part of Speech are 
liable. 

83. Sorts of Verbs. Verbs are considered as active, 
passive, or neuter. A Verb is called active when it ex- 
presses an action which is produced by the nominative of 
the sentence; as, " Pitt restrained the Bank." It is pas- 
sive when it expresses an action which is received, or 
endured, by the person or thing which is the nominative 
of the sentence; as, "the Bank is restrained." It is 
neuter when it expresses simply the state of being, or of 
existence, of a person or thing; as, "Dick lies in bed;" 
or, when it expresses an action confined within the actor. 

84. It is of great consequence that you clearly under- 
stand these distinctions, because I shall, by-and-by, use 
these terms very frequently. And in order to give you a 
proof of the necessity of attending to these distinctions, 
I will here give you a specimen of the errors which are 
sometimes committed by those who do not understand 
Grammar. This last-mentioned Verb, to lie, becomes, in 
the past time, lay. Thus : " Dick lies on a bed now, but 
some time ago, he lay on the floor." This verb is often 
confounded with the Verb to lay, which is an active Verb, 
and which becomes, in its past time, laid. Thus : "I lay 
my hat on the table to-day, but, yesterday, I laid it on 
the shelf." Let us take another instance, in order the 
more clearly to explain this matter. A Verb may some- 
times be what we call a neuter Verb, though it expresses 
an action ; but this happens when the action is confined 
within the actor / that is to say, when there is no object 
to ichich, the action passes. Strike is clearly an active 
Verb, because something is stricken; a stroke is given to, 
or put upon, something. But in the case of to rise, 
though there is an action, it passes on to no object ; as, I 
rise early. Here is no object to which the action passes. 
But to raise is an active Verb, because the action passes on 
to an object ; as, I raise a stick, I raise my hand, I raise 



52 Etymology 

my head, and also I raise myself; because, though in this 
last instance the action is confined to twe, it is understood 
that my mind gives the motion to my body. These 
two Verbs are, in speaking and writing, incessantly con- 
founded ; though one is a neuter and the other an active 
Verb, though one is regular and the other irregular, or 
though they are not, in any person, time, or mode, com- 
posed of the same letters. This confusion could never 
take place if attention were paid to the principle above 
laid down. 

This is one of the hard passages in the gospel of grammar; a 
passage which, I am sure, has been a stumbling-block to many a 
poor fellow who has been unable to make head or tail of it. Well 
do I remember the difficulty I had myself, when I first studied 
this grammar, in making it out. It is, I now see. no wonder that 
the matter was very cloudy to me: for even Cobbett. the plainest 
and clearest of writers, has got into a muddle about it, as I shall 
presently show. 

Look again at my explanation of the difference between the 
transitive and the intransitive verb (note to paragraph 11). Then 
remember that Cobbett's " nominative*' is another word for ml 
and his "w&" another word I or predicate. " Boys study gram- 
mar/' These three words form subject, predicate, and object ' * Man 
dies." Here is nothing but subject and predicate; and you will 
notice that "study" has an object, while "dies" has not. 

I rise at six o'clock. I raise a wall ; I raise the price ; I raise my 
voice. You will readily see that the verb to rise is intransitive, 
because it has no object: its action does not pass to anything: and 
that to raise is transitive, because it has an object: its action passes 
to something, even if it is my own voice, head or hand. Xow both 
these verbs, as used by Cobbett. are in the active voice, for the pass- 
ing or not passing of the action has nothing whatever to do with 
the verb being in the active or passive voice, but only with its 
being transitive or intransitive. It is the state of the subject (or 
nominative) alone that determines whether a verb is active or pas- 
sive. "I rise early. I raise my hand.'' Both these verbs are in the 
active voice: for the subject or nominative (I) is acting, and not 
acted upon. The verb is in the passive voice where the subject or 
nominative is actet on: as. I am raised: but it is in the active 
voice when the subjec or nominative is acting: as, I rise at rive 



Of Verbs. 53 

o'clock. Notice that the verb in the passive voice always consists 
of some part of the verb to be and the past participle of another 
verb. Cobbett is altogether wrong in saying that "to raise is an 
active verb because it passes on to an object ; " it would be active 
whether the action passed on to an object or not ; for, as I have 
said, it is the state of the srBJECT that determines its activeness or 
passiveness, and not the verb itself. The passing of the action 
simply shows that it is transitive. 

Now observe that this matter of transitive and intransitive verbs 
is something by itself, and that active and passive voice is also 
something by itself. It will, perhaps, help you to understand the 
matter, when I tell you that no intransitive verb can be used in the 
passive voice. You can not say, I am slept, I am dreamt, I am 
lived. No ; only transitive verbs can be used in the passive voice : 
I am hated, I am robbed, I am punished. These forms come from 
the verbs to hate, to rob, to punish, all of which take an object, and 
are therefore transitive ; but the forms to sleep, to dream, to live, do 
not take an object and are therefore intransitive, and cannot be 
used in the passive voice. 

Now, as to that other bugbear, the neuter verb, I think we shall 
not have much difficulty in understanding it. I never learned the 
meaning of it from Cobbett, I must confess. And here I may 
inform you that many grammarians discard the term neuter alto- 
gether, and set neuter verbs down simply as intransitive verbs, 
which, indeed, they are. But you must understand what is meant 
by a neuter verb, any way. You have seen that when a verb is 
used in the active voice, the subject or nominative of that verb 
is acting, and that when one is used in the passive voice, 
the subject or nominative of that verb is acted ox. Now, 
where a neuter verb is used, the subject is neither acting nor 
acted on; it is neithee, neutee. Take an example of all three 
cases: Tommy kicks the pony; Tommy is kicked by the pony; 
Tommy is ill. Now in the first case, kicks is active, because the 
subject (Tommy) is acting ; in the second case, is kicked is passive, 
because the subject is acted on; and in the third case, it is neuter, 
because the subject is neither acting nor acted on: it is existence 
without action. Just try if this is not the case with such verbs 
as to sit, to stand, to exist, to live, to lie, to sleep. When you are 
sitting, standing, existing, living, etc. , you are neither acting nor 
acted on; you are neither, neuter. Of course, these verbs are 
intransitive, too; for all neuter verbs are intransitive, but ali 
intransitive verbs are not neuter. There's the rub ; there is where 



54 Etymology 

Cobbett makes his mistake: he calls the verb to rise neuter, 
while it is nothing of the sort: it is simply intransitive, and 
active. The most recent classification of verbs is into active- 
t , .:-:>. , ::"'.-7". >::■::':-.- intra ;-:':nr. and :iz\,:,-\ He fafefci the pony: 
he rises; he tfw*. Cobbett. no doubt, followed the grammarians 
and di -makers of his time. 

85. Having thus given you the means of distinguishing 
the sorts of Verbs, I now proceed to matters which are 
common to all the sorts. There are four things to be 
considered in a verb: the person, the number, the time, 
and the rn 

86. The Person. — Read again Letter YL on the Etymol- 
ogy of Pronouns. You will there clearly see the use of 
this distinction about Persons ; and. as I have told you, 
you will find that it is a matter of great consequence ; be- 
cause it will now. at once, be evident to you that, unless 
the distinction of person be attended to, almost every 
sentence must be erroneous. 

ST. The <on with the Xoun or 

the Pronoun which is the nominative of the sentence. 
Look back at Letter V, and at paragraphs 44. 45. 46, and 
47. in order to refresh your memory as to the nominative 
and other cases. TLe Verb. then, must agree with the 
nominative: as. "I write; he icrites." To say. "I wriU 
he write /" these would be both erroneous. 

88. Lookback at the explanation about Que persons in 
the Etymology of Pronouns in Letter YL There are 
three persons ; but our Verbs have no variation in their 
spelling, except for the third pt 'son singular. For we 
sav. "I --. t;u icrite. we ;.■ 'i:e. they icrite :" and only 
u he, she, or it writes? This. then, is a very plain matter. 

V:<. XorBEB is a matter equally plain, seeing that our 
Yerbs do not. except in one or two instances, vary their 
endings, to express number. But when several nouns or 
pronoun> it be taken to make the 

Yerb agree with them; as. '-Knight and Johnstone resist 



Of Verbs. 55 

the tyrants." Not resists. But this will be more fully 
dwelt on in the Syntax. 

90. The Time. — The Verb has variations to express the 
time of an action ; as, " Sidmouth writes a Circular Letter ; 
Sidmouth icrote a Circular Letter ; Sidmouth will write a 
Circular Letter/' Again: "The Queen defies the tyrants ; 
the Queen defied the tyrants ; the Queen will defy the 
tyrants." The Times of a Verb are, therefore, called the 
present, foe past, and foe future. 

91. The Modes. — The Modes of Verbs are the different 
manners of expressing an action or a state of being, which 
manners are sometimes positive, sometimes conditional, 
and sometimes indeterminate ; and there are changes or 
variations, in the spelling, or writing, of the Verb, or of 
the little words used with the Verb, in order to express 
this difference in manner and sense. I will give you an 
instance: "He walks fast." "If he walk fast, he will 
fatigue himself." In most other languages the Verb 
changes its form very often and very much to make it 
express the different modes. In ours it does not ; because 
we have little words called signs, which we use with the 
Verbs instead of varying the form of the Verbs them- 
selves. To make this matter clear, I will give you an 
example of the English compared with the French 
language in this respect. 

E. F. 

I march, Je marche. 

I marched, Je marchais. 

I might march, Je marchasse. 

I should march, Je marcherais. 

There are other variations in the French Verb ; but we 
effect the purposes of these variations by the use of the 
signs, shall, may, might, could, would, and others. 

92. The Modes are f our in number ; the Infinitive, the 
Indicative, the Subjunctive, and the Imperative. Besides 



56 Etymology 

these, there are the two Participles* of which I shall speak 
presently. 

93. The Infinitive Mode is the Verb in its primitive 
state; as. to march. And this is called the Infinitive be- 
cause it is without bounds or limit. It merely expresses 
the action of marching, without any constraint as to per- 
son or number or time. The little word to makes, in fact, 
a part of the, Verb. This word to is, of itself, a prreposi- 
tion ; but, as prefixed to Verbs, it is merely a sign of the 
Infinitive Mode. In other languages there is no such 
sign. In the French, for instance, aller means to go/ 
ecrire means to write. Thus, then, you will bear in mind 
that in English, the to makes a part of the Verb itself, 
when in the Infinitive Mode. 

94. The Indicative Mode is that in which we express 
an action, or state of being, positively: that is to say, 
without any condition, or any dependent circumstance. 
It merely indicates the action or state of being, without 
being subjoined to anything which renders the action or 
state of being dependent on any other action or state of 
being. Thus: u Me writes" This is the Indicative. 

95. But the .Subjunctive Mode comes into use when I 
say, u It he write, the guilty tyrants will be ready with 
their dungeons and axes." In this case there is some- 
thing subjoined ; and therefore this is called the Sub- 
junctive Mode. Observe, however, that in our language 
there is no very great use in this distinction of modes ; 
because, for the most part, our little signs do the busi- 
ness, and they never vary in the letters of which they are 
composed. The distinction is useful only as regards the 
employment of Verbs without the signs, and where the 
signs are left to be understood? as in the above case, "If 
he (should) icrite. the guilty tyrants will be ready." And 
observe, further, that when the signs are used, or under- 
stood, the Verb retains its original or primitive form 
throughout all the persons, numbers, and times. 



Of Verbs. 57 

96. The Imperative Mode is mentioned here merely for 
form's sake. It is that state of the Verb which com- 
mands, orders, bids, calls to, or invokes y as, come hither ; 
be good ; march away ; pay me. In other languages there 
are changes in the spelling of the Verbs to answer to this 
mode ; but in ours there are none of these ; and therefore 
the matter is hardly worth notice, except as a mere mat- 
ter of form. 

97. The Participles, however, are different in point of 
importance. They are of two sorts, the active and the 
passive. The former ends always in ing, and the latter 
is generally the same as the past time of the Verb out of 
which it grows. Thus : working is an active participle, 
and worked a passive participle. They are called parti- 
ciples because they partake of the qualities of other Parts 
of Speech as well as of Verbs. For instance: "I am 
toorking y working is laudable ; a working man is more 
worthy of honor than a titled plunderer who lives in idle- 
ness." In the first instance, working is a Verb, in the 
second a Noun, in the third an Adjective. So in the case 
of the passive participle: I tcorked yesterday; that is 
icorked mortar. The first is a Verb, the last an Adjective. 

After the indicative, grammarians now insert another mood, 
called the potential mood, which indicates power, permission, pos- 
sibility, necessity, determination, duty. This mood Cobbett runs 
into the subjunctive, after the manner of the French. It is that 
form which necessitates one of "those powerful little words," as 
he calls them, may, might, can, must, will, shall, should, toould. 
This matter of mood, which is quite a difficult subject for begin- 
ners, became much clearer to me when I saw how the Germans 
termed their moods in their expressive language. They call the 
infinitive mood the ground-form ; the indicative the reality-form; 
the potential the possibility -form ; the subjunctive, the doubt-form ; 
and the imperative the commanding -form. Like the who-case y the 
whose-case, and the whom-case, these words are far more expressive 
than the Latin terms we use, which ought to have been left where 
they belonged, in Latin. 

You will perhaps be surprised to see will and shall, would and 
3* 



58 Etymology 

should, set down as belonging to the potential mood. You will 
say they belong to the future and the conditional. So they do ; 
but they belong to the potential, too, as I shall show you by-and- 
by. Take these two examples of the difference between the future 
and the potential : ' ' I shall write (future) to you, if I can. I will 
write (potential) to you, come what may. You will do (future) 
that to-morrow. You shall do (potential) as I tell you." This is 
one of the most difficult matters in English grammar ; a matter 
which, Cobbett says, foreigners never learn rightly, but which na- 
tives learn to use rightly from infancy, and do so without ever 
thinking of the matter. Extensive reading of good authors and 
extensive intercourse with good speakers are among the best 
means of learning the correct use of these words. I have read of 
a Frenchman who, on falling into the river, exclaimed: "I will 
drown, and nobody shall help me!" More of this anon. (Note to 
paragraph 258.) 

98. Thus have I gone through all the circumstances of 
change to which Verbs are liable. I will now give you 
the complete conjugation of a Verb. To conjugate, in its 
usual acceptation, means to join together ; and, as used 
by grammarians, it means to place under one view all the 
variations in the form of a Verb; beginning with the 
Innnitive Mode and ending with the Participle. I will 
now lay before you, then, the conjugation of the Verb to 
work, exhibiting that Verb in all its persons, numbers, 
times, and modes. 

rNEIOTTiVE MODE. 

To Work. 
INDICATIVE MODE. 

Singular. Plural. 

( 1st Person. I work, We work. 

Present J 2d Person> Thou workest> Y ou work. 

Time. ^ 3d p erson# H e> s k e , or j t wor ks. They work. 

Past C — ^ worked, "We worked. 

Time ) — Thou workedst, You worked. 

(^ — He worked, They worked. 

Future ( — I shall or will work, We shall or will work. 

Time. < — Thou shalt or wilt work, You shall or will work. 

(_ — He shall or will w^k, They shall or will work. 



Of Verbs. 59 

SUBJUNCTIVE MODE. 

If I work, or may, might, could, would, or should work. 

If thou work, or may " " " work. 

If he, she, or it work, or may " " " work. 

If we work, or may " ' ' " work. 

If you work, or may " " " work. 

If they work, or may " " " work. 

IMPERATIVE MODE. 

Let me work, Let us work. 

Work thou, Work you. 

Let him work, Let them work. 

PARTICIPLES. 

Active. — Working. 
Passive. — Worked. 

99. Some explanatory remarks are necessary here. The 
third person singular of the Indicative present used to be 
written with eth ; as, worketh ; but this spelling has long 
been disused. The past time may be formed by did; as, 
did work, instead of worked ; and do work may be used 
in the present time ; but, in fact, these little words are a 
great deal more than mere marks of the times. They are 
used in one time to express the negative of another, or to 
affirm with more than ordinary emphasis. 

100. Grammarians generally make a present and a past 
time under the Subjunctive Mode; but the truth is that 
any of the signs may apply to the present, past, or future 
of that mode. These are little words of vast import and 
of constant use ; and though that use is so very difficult 
to be learned by foreigners, we ourselves never make mis- 
takes with regard to it. The Verb to be alone changes 
its form in order to make a past time in the Subjunctive 
Mode. 

101. As to the Imperative Mode, where the pronouns 
thou and you are put after the Verb, we seldom put the 
thou and the you. We make use of the Verb only, which 
is quite sufficient. 



60 Etymology 

102. Some grammarians put in their conjugations what 
they call the compound times ; as, I have worked, I had 
worked, I shall have worked, I may have worked, and so 
on. But this can only serve to fill up a book; for all 
these consist merely in the introduction and use of the 
Verb to have in its various parts. In the above conjuga- 
tion all the changes or variations of the Verb are exhib- 
ited ; and it is those changes and variations which, under 
the present head, form the important object of our 
inquiry. 

Well, at the risk of incurring the reproach of merely " filling up 
a book," or, as the reviewers call it, "padding a book," I shall 
give you this one verb entire, in its present form, with its present 
names for moods and tenses. Do not be afraid ; it will not confuse 
you, if you will only be patient. There are about six or seven 
thousand verbs in our language, and they are all, except in the 
past tense and past participle, conjugated like this. It is in these 
last two parts that the irregular verbs vary. You cannot utter a 
single sentence, however short, without a verb ; so, surely, you 
ought to see this important part of speech from head to foot. Be- 
sides, I believe that our present form of laying out the verb is 
simpler than it was in Cobbett's time, for the tenses are so arranged 
that they are more easily remembered. (See next page.) 

You will notice that the compound forms are, as Cobbett says, 
nothing but the past participle, w&r/ced, and the various forms of 
the verb to have. But the seeing it will help you to remember it. 
As to the tenses, consider for a moment how many kinds of time 
there are in nature. What is the time called in which you now 
are? What time is that you had yesterday? What time is to- 
morrow ? Well, there are three kinds, present, past, and future ; 
and in grammar you may say there are really only three tenses, 
with a tail to each of them, a perfect tail ; and this perfect tail is 
the compound form of the verb. It is nothing but present, present- 
perfect ; past, past-perfect; future, future-perfect. As to the using 
of them, you will learn that when we come to the Syntax. Then 
you will notice chat there are five moods, just as there are five con- 
tinents, five oceans, five races of men, and five zones. Notice that 
the subjunctive has no changes whatever in its endings. This 
mood, of which common people and common writers know nothing, 
and which, some writers think, will finally disappear altogether, is 



Of Verbs. 



61 



Complete conjugation of the active verb To Work. 

INFINITIVE MOOD. 

Present tense— To work. Present perfect tense— To have worked. 

INDICATIVE MOOD. 



SIMPLE TENSES. 

Present tense. 
I work, 
Thou workest, 
He works, 
We work, 
You work, 
They work, 

Past tense. 
I work, 

Thou workedst, 
He worked, 
We worked, 
You worked, 
They worked, 

Future tense. 
I shall work, 
Thou wilt work, 
He will work. 
We shall work, 
You will work, 
They will work. 

Present tense conditional. 
I should work, 
Thou wouldst work, 
He would work, 
We should work, 
You would work. 
They would work, 



Present tense. 
I may, can, will work, 
Thou mayst, canst, shalt work, 
He may, can, shall work, 
We may, can, shaU work, 
You may, can, shall work, 
They may, can, shall work, 

Past tense. 
I might, could, should work, 



COMPOUND TENSES. 

Present perfect tense. 
I have worked. 
Thou hast worked. 
He has worked. 
We have worked. 
You have worked. 
They have worked. 

Past perfect tense . 
I had worked. 
Thou hadst worked. 
He had worked. 
We had worked. 
You had worked. 
They had worked. 

Future perfect tense. 
I shall have worked. 
Thou wilt have worked. 
He will have worked. 
We shall have worked. 
You will have worked. 
They will have worked. 

Perfect tense conditional. 
I should have worked. 
Thou wouldst have worked. 
He would have worked. 
We should have worked. 
You would have worked. 
They would have worked. 
POTENTIAL MOOD. 



Present perfect tense. 
I may, can, will have worked. 



Thou mayst, canst, shalt have worked. 
He may, can, shall have worked. 
We may, can, shall have worked. 
You may, can, shall have worked. 
They may, can, shall have worked. 

Past perfect tense. 
I might, could, should have worked. 
Thoumightst,couldst,shouldst work, Thou mightst, couldst, shouldst have 

worked. 
He might could, should work, He might, could, should have worked. 

We might, could, should work, We might, could, should have worked. 

You might, could, should work, You might, could, should have worked. 

They might, could, should work, They might, could,should have worked. 
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD. 
Present tense. Present perfect tense. 

If I work, If I have worked, 

thou work, thou have worked, 

he work, he have worked, 

we work, we have worked, 

you work, you have worked, 

they work, they have worked. 

Past tense. Past perfect tense. 



If I worked, 
thou worked, 
he worked, 
we worked, 
you worked, 
they worked, 



Work! 



Present participle. 
Working. 



If I had worked, 
thou had worked, 
he had worked, 
we had worked, 
you had worked, 
they had worked. 
IMPERATIVE MOOD. 

Work thou ! 
PARTICIPLES. 
Past participle. Present perfect (participial form). 
Worke d. H a ving worked . 



62 Etymology 

used to mark a certain uncertainty or contingency which the indic- 
ative cannot well mark, and is used not only after if, but after though, 
although, lest, unless, provided that, and various other expressions in- 
dicating uncertainty. The only verb in our whole language which 
makes a complete change in the subjunctive is the verb to he, and 
that becomes if I he, if I were. Cobbett follows the conjugation of 
the French verb in using the verb let in the imperative. "Let me 
work " is not the imperative of the verb to work, but the imperative 
of the verb to let ; as is the case with everything that follows let • 
let me eat, let me drink, let me be. No English verb needs more 
than the one word in the imperative, for the subject or pronoun 
you is generally unexpressed, or left understood. It is sometimes 
used for emphasis or contrast; as, "Work you! I shall not 
work." As to those two great stumbling-blocks of many persons, 
shall and will, should and would, all you have to do here is to notice 
that, in the future and conditional tenses, shall and should are gen- 
erally used in the first person singular and plural — that is, after 
I and we — and that will and tcould are generally used in the other 
persons. 

103. The Verbs to have and to be are of great use in our 
language. They are called auxiliary verbs. To let and to 
do are also called auxiliaries, but they are of far less im- 
portance than to have and to be. Before, however, I say 
more on the subject of these auxiliaries, I must speak of 
all the Verbs as regular or irregular, just observing here 
that the word auxiliary means helper, or helping. 

104. Verbs are called regular when they have their 
changes or variations according to a certain rule or 
manner. Thus : "I walk, I icalked ; I work, I icorked." 
But I cannot say, "I writed" I must say, "I wrote." 
Xow observe that we call regular Verbs all those which 
end their past time of the Indicative and their passive 
participle in ed; and if you now look back at the conju- 
gation of the Verb to work, you will find that it is a regu- 
lar Verb. Indeed this is the case with almost all Verbs. 
But there are some little irregularities even here, and they 
must be very well attended to, because a want of attention 
to them leads to very great errors even as to spelling. 



Of Verbs. 63 

105. These little irregularities I shall notice under five 
separate heads ; and if you should forget, at any time, 
what has been said on the subject, a reference to these 
will in a moment set you right. — I. The Verb to work is 
perfectly regular, for it has eel added to it in order to 
form the past time, and also in order to form the passive 
participle. It is the same with the Verbs to walk, to turn, 
to abandon, and many others. But if the Infinitive, that 
is to say, the primitive or original word, end in e, then d 
only is added in the past time and participle, and st in- 
stead of est after thou ; as in the case of to move, which 
becomes moved and movest. You have seen, also, in the 
case of the Verb to work, that we add only an s to form 
the third person singular of the present of the Indicative ; 
he works. But if the Infinitive end in h, s, x, or z, then es 
must be added ; as, to wish, he icishes ; to toss, he tosses ; 
to box, he boxes; to buzz, he buzzes. — II. "When the Infini- 
tive snds in y, and when that y has a consonant imme- 
diately before it, the y is changed into ie, to form the third 
person singular of the present of the Indicative ; as to 
reply, he replies. "Put (and I beg you to mark it well) if 
the ending y have a vouvl immediately before it, the Verb 
follows the general rule in Si ?* formation of the third 
person singular of the present o£ ji*r Indicative; as to 
delay, he delays; and not he delaies. It is the same in 
the second person singular ; as, to reply, thou repliest, to 
delay, thou delay est. — m. When the Infinitive ends in y 
with a consonant immediately before it, the past time of 
the Indicative and the passive participle are formed by 
using an i instead of the y ; as, to reply, he replied ; to 
deny, it was denied. But if the y be preceded by a 
vowel, ed is added to the y in the usual manner ; as, to 
delay, he delayed. — IV. The active participle, which 
always ends in ing, is in general formed by simply adding 
the ing to the Infinitive ; as, to toork, loorking ; to talk, 
talking. But if the Infinitive end in a single e, the e is 



G4 Etymology 

dropped ; as, to move, moving. The Verb to be is an ex- 
ception to this ; but then that is an irregular Verb. It is 

Say silent e, and the rule will hold good throughout. The 
e is not silent in be, and is therefore not dropped in being. It is 
never retained, even where one part of speech is converted into 
another, except where the omission of it might cause a doubtful 
pronunciation; as, peace, peaceable; change, changeable. 

when the Infinitive ends in a single e, mind ; for if the e 
be double, the general rule is followed ; as, to free, freeing. 
"When the infinitive ends in ie, those letters are changed 
into y in the forming of the active participle ; as, to lie, 
lying. — V. When the Infinitive ends in a single consonant, 
which has a single voicel immediately before it, the final 
consonant is doubled, not only in forming the active par- 
ticiple, but also in forming the past time of the Indicative, 
and the passive participle ; as, to rap, rapping ; I rapped, 
it was rapped. But, observe well, this rule holds good 
only as to words of one syllable ; for if the Infinitive of 
the Verb have more than one syllable, the consonant is 
not doubled unless the accent be on the last syllable; and 
the accent means the main force, weight, or sound of 
the voice in pronouncing the word. For instance, in the 
word to open, the accent is on the first syllable ; and 
therefore we write, opening, opened. But when we come 
to the Verb to refer, where we find the accent on the last 
syllable, we write, referring, referred. 

It is, perhaps, worth while noticing that these are principles 
that apply not only to the verbs, but to various other parts of 
speech; in fact, principles that run through the whole language. 
Just as, with nouns, the word ending in y preceded by a consonant 
changes the y into ie (lady, ladies), but does not change the y if 
preceded by a vowel (valley, valleys) ; so with verbs, I carry, he 
carries; I obey, he obeys; so with adjectives, happy, happier; gay, 
gayer. And as we have seen that adjectives of one syllable, ending 
in a consonant preceded by a single vowel double the consonant in 
the comparative and superlative degrees (hot, hotter, hottest), but 
do not do so if preceded by a double vowel or by none at all (neat, 
neater ; rich, richer), so it is with verbs, of similar ending, in the 



Of Verbs. 65 

past tense and in the participles, rap, rapped, rapping; cheat, 
cheated, cheating; work, worked, working. It is something that 
is demanded by the pronunciation of the words ; for if we did not 
double the final consonant in words of this kind, we should have 
to say ho'ter instead of hotter, raping instead of rapping. And 
this reminds me to say that it is of the utmost importance for you 
to study and understand the marking and accentuation of words 
in the dictionary; for if you wish to pronounce the English 
language correctly, you will find it necessary to consult the dic- 
tionary very frequently. The most learned Englishman or Ameri- 
can that lives, or has ever lived — not excepting Doctor Johnson or 
Noah Webster himself — is, or has been, constantly obliged to con- 
sult the dictionary for the correct pronunciation of English words. 
How different, in this respect, is the German language! In that 
language there is but one single word irregularly pronounced; 
le-ben'-dig, instead of le'-ben-dig, like le'ben. And as to the mean- 
ing, every German word explains itself ; so that no German boy or 
man need ever look into a dictionary to find out the meaning or 
the pronunciation of a word in his language. Every word in that 
language is spelled, too, as it is pronounced. But the gram- 
matical construction of the language is far more difficult than 
ours. Mr. White confesses that, in order to learn German, the 
grammar of the language must be studied. I will go so far as to 
say, that an Englishman or American who studies the grammar of 
that language thoroughly well, will never need much further study 
of the grammar of his mother-tongue. 

106. These irregularities, though very necessary to be 
attended to, do not prevent us from considering the 
Verbs which are subject to them as regular Verbs. The 
mark of a regular Verb is that its past time said passive 
participle end in eel / every Verb which does not answer 
to this mark is irregular. 

107. There are many of these irregular Verbs, of 
which I shall here insert a complete list. All the irreg- 
ularities (except the little irregularities just mentioned) 
which it is possible to find in an English Verb (the auxil- 
iary Verbs excepted) are in the^?as£ time and the passive 
participle only. Therefore, it will be sufficient to give a 
list, showing, in those two instances, what are the irreg- 
ularities of each Verb ; and, in order to render this list 



66 



Etymology 



convenient, and to shorten the work of referring to it, I 
shall make it alphabetical. With the past time and the 
passive participle of the several Verbs I shall use the first 
person singular of the pronoun, in order to make my 
examples as clear as possible. 

LIST OF IKKEGULAK VEKBS. 



INFINITIVE. 


PAST TIME. 


PAETICIPLES. 


to abide, 


I abode, 


I have abode. 


to be, 


I was, 


u 


been. 


to bear, 


I bore, 


u 


borne. 


to beat, 


I beat, 


u 


beaten. 


to become, 


I became, 


u 


become. 


to befall, 


it befell, 


it has befallen. 


to beget, 


I begot, 


I have 


! begotten. 


to begin, 


I began, 


u 


begun. 


to behold, 


I beheld, 


a 


beheld. 


to bend, 


I bended, 


u 


bent. 


to beseech, 


I besought, 


u 


besought. 


to bid, 


I bade, 


u 


bidden. 


to bind, 


I bound, 


a 


bound. 


to bite, 


I bit, 


a 


bitten. 


to bleed, 


I bled, 


Li. 


bled. 


to break, 


I broke, 


u 


broken. 


to breed, 


I bred, 


u 


bred. 


to bring, 


I brought, 


it 


brought. 


to buy, 


I bought, 


u 


bought. 


to catch, 


I caught, 


u 


caught. 


to choose, 


I chose, 


u 


chosen. 


to cleave. 


I clove, 


a 


cloven. 


to come, 


I came, 


u 


come. 


to cost, 


I cost, 


u 


cost. 


to cut, 


I cut, 


a 


cut. 


to die, 


I died, 


u 


died. 


to do, 


I did, 


u 


done. 


to drink, 


I drank, 


a 


drunk» 



Of Verbs. 



67 



INFINITIVE. 


PAST TIME 


PARTICIPLES. 


to drive, 


I drove. 


I have 


) driven. 


to eat, 


I ate, 


u 


eaten. 


to fall, 


I fell, 


a 


fallen. 


to feed, 


I fed, 


a 


fed. 


to feel, 


I felt, 


u 


felt. 


to fight, 


I fought, 


u 


fought. 


to find, 


I found, 


u 


found. 


to flee, 


I fled, 


u 


fled. 


to fling, 


I flung, 


u 


flung. 


to fly, 


I flew, 


a 


flown. 


to forbear, 


I forbore, 


a 


forborne. 


to forbid, 


I forbade, 


a 


forbidden. 


to forget, 


I forgot, 


a 


forgotten. 


to forgive, 


I forgave, 


a 


forgiven. 


to forsake, 


I*forsook, 


a 


forsaken. 


to get, 


I got, 


u 


gotten. 


to give, 


I gave, 


a 


given. 


to go, 


I went, 


u 


gone. 


to grind, 


I ground, 


u 


ground. 


to have, 


I had, 


u 


had. 


to hear, 


I heard, 


a 


heard. 


to hide, 


I hid, 


a 


hidden. 


to hit, 


I hit, 


a 


hit. 


to hold, 


I held, 


a 


held. 


to hurt, 


I hurt, 


cc 


hurt. 


to keep, 


I kept, 


u 


kept. 


to know, 


I knew, 


u 


known. 


to lay, 


I laid, 


a 


laid. 


to lead, 


lied, 


u 


led. 


to leave, 


I left, 


a 


left. 


to lend, 


I lent, 


u 


lent. 


to let, 


I let, 


a 


let. 


to lie, 


Hay, 


a 


lain. 


to lose, 


I lost, 


a 


lost. 


to make, 


I made, 


a 


made. 



68 



Etymology 



INFINITIVE. 

to meet, 
to overcome, 
to overdo, 
to pay, 
to put, 
to read, 
to rend, 
to ride, 
to ring, 
to rise, 
to run, 
to say, 
to see, 
to seek, 
to sell, 
to send, 
to set, 
to shake, 
to shear, 
to shed, 
to show, 
to shrink, 
to shoe, 
to shoot, 
to shut, 
to sing, 
to sink, 
to sit, 
to slay, 
to sleep, 
to slide, 
to slit, 
to smite, 
to speak, 
to speed, 



PAST TIME. 

I met, 
I overcame, 
I overdid, 
I paid, 
I put, 
I read, 
I rent, 
I rode, 
I rang, 
I rose, 
I ran, 
I said, 
I saw, 
I sought, 
I sold, 
I sent, 
I set, 
I shook, 
I sheared, 
I shed, 
I showed, 
I shrank, 
I shod, 
I shot, 
I shut, 
I sang, 
I sank, 
I sat, 
I slew, 
I slept, 
I slid, 
I slit, 
I smote, 
I spoke, 
I sped, 



PARTICIPLES. 


I have met. 


a 


overcome. 


a 


overdone. 


it 


paid. 


a 


put. 


a 


read. 


a 


rent. 


a 


ridden. 


a 


rung. 


a 


risen. 


it 


run. 


it 


said. 


a 


seen. 


a 


sought. 


a 


sold. 


a 


sent. 


a 


set. 


a 


shaken. 


it 


shorn. 


a 


shed. 


tt 


shown. 


a 


shrunk. 


tt 


shod. 


a 


shot. 


a 


shut. 


a 


sung. 


a 


sunk. 


a 


sat. 


tt 


slain. 


a 


slept. 


kt 


slidden. 


a 


slit 


a 


smitten. 


it 


spokeiu 


u 


sped. 



Of Verbs. 



69 



INFINITIVE. 


PAST TIME. 


PARI 


?ICIPLES. 


to spend, 


I spent, 


I have spent. 


to spin, 


I span, 


u 


spun. 


to spit, 


I spat, 


u 


spat. 


to spread, 


I spread, 


it 


spread. 


to stand, 


I stood, 


it 


stood. 


to steal, 


I stole, 


Li 


stolen. 


to stick, 


I stuck, 


a 


stuck. 


to stink, 


I stunk, 


a 


stunk. 


to strike, 


I struck, 


a 


stricken. 


to swear, 


I swore, 


a 


sworn. 


to take, 


I took, 


u 


taken. 


to teach, 


I taught, 


u 


taught. 


to tear, 


I tore, 


u 


torn. 


to tell, 


I told, 


a 


told. 


to think, 


I thought, 


a 


thought. 


to tread, 


I trod, 


a 


trodden. 


to understand, 


I understood, 


u 


understood. 


to wear, 


I wore, 


a 


worn. 


to win, 


I won, 


a 


won. 


to wind, 


I wound, 


a 


wound. 


to write, 


I wrote, 


a 


written. 



108. It is usual with grammarians to insert several 
Verbs in their List of Irregulars which I have not 
inserted here. But I have, in the above list, placed 
every Verb in our language which is really irregular. 
However, I will here subjoin a list of those Verbs which 
are, by some grammarians, reckoned irregular ; and then 
I will show you, not only that they are not irregular, 
strictly speaking, but that you ought by all means to use 
them in a regular form. 



70 



JEtymology 



LIST OF VERBS WHICH, BY SOME PERSONS, ARE ERRONEOUSLY 
DEEMED IRREGULARS. 



INFINITIVE. 


PAST TIME. 


PARTICIPLES. 


to awake, 


I awoke, 


I have awaked. 


to bereave, 


I bereft, 


u 


bereft. 


to blow, 


I blew, 


a 


blown. 


to build, 


I bunt, 


u 


built. 


to burn, 


I burnt, 


a 


burnt. 


to burst, 


I burst, 


u 


burst. 


to cast, 


I cast, 


a 


cast. 


to chide, 


I chid, 


u 


chidden. 


to cling, 


I clung, 


a 


clung. 


to creep, 


I crept, 


it 


crept. 


to crow, 


I crew, 


a 


crowed. 


to curse, 


I curst, 


u 


curst. 


to dare, 


I dared, 


u 


dared. 


to deal, 


I dealt, 


u 


dealt. 


to dig, 


I dug, 


u 


dug. 


to dip, 


I dipt, 


a 


dipt. 


to draw, 


I drew, 


u 


drawn. 


to dream, 


I dreamt, 


a 


dreamt. 


to dwell, 


I dwelt, 


a 


dwelt. 


to freeze, 


I froze, 


u 


frozen. 


to geld, 


I gelt, 


u 


gelt. 


to gild, 


I gilt, 


u 


gilt. 


to gird, 


I girt, 


u 


girt. 


to grow, 


I grew, 


u 


grown. 


to bang, 


I hung, 


a 


hung. 


to help, 


I helpt, 


a 


helpt. 


to hew, 


I hewed, 


a 


hewn. 


to kneel, 


I knelt, 


a 


knelt. 


to knit, 


I knit, 


a 


knit. 


to lade, 


I laded, 


a 


laden. 


to leap, 


I leaped, 


u 


leapt. 


to light, 


Hit, 


a 


lighted. 



Of Verbs. 



71 



INFINITIVE. 


PAST TIME. 


PARTICIPLES. 


to load, 


I loaded, 


I have loaden or laden 


to mean, 


I meant, 


I have meant. 


to mow, 


I mowed, 


u 


mown. 


to overflow, 


I overflowed, 


it 


overflown. 


to saw, 


I sawed, 


a 


sawn. 


to shave, 


I shaved, 


it 


shaven. 


to shred, 


I shred, 


tt 


shred. 


to shine, 


I shone, 


a 


shone. 


to sling, 


I slung, 


u 


slung. 


to slink, 


I slunk, 


tt 


slunk. 


to slip, 


I slipt, 


a 


slipt. 


to smell, 


I smelt, 


" 


smelt. 


to snow, 


it snowed, 


it has 


snown. 


to sow, 


I sowed, 


I have 


5 sown. 


to spell, 


I spelt, 


tt 


spelt. 


to spill, 


I spilt, 


it 


spilt. 


to split, 


I split, 


tt 


split. 


to spring, 


I sprang, 


tt 


sprung. 


to stamp, 


I stampt, 


a 


stampt. 


to sting, 


I stung, 


it 


stung. 


to strew, 


I strewed, 


tt 


strewn. 


to strow, 


I strowed, 


it 


strown. 


to stride, 


I strode, 


u 


stridden. 


to string, 


I strung, 


it 


strung. 


to strip, 


I stript, 


it 


stript. 


to strive, 


I strove, 


a 


striven. 


to sweep, 


I swept, 


u 


swept. 


to swell, 


I swelled, 


tt 


swollen. 


to swim, 


I swam, 


i. 


swum. 


to swing, 


I swung, 


a 


swung. 


to thrive, 


I throve, 


a 


thriven. 


to throw, 


I threw, 


a 


thrown. 


to thrust, 


I thrust, 


u 


thrust. 


to wax, 


I waxed, 


a 


waxen. 


to weave, 


I wove. 


it 


woven. 



72 Etymology 

ISTDsTTIVE. PAST TIME. PARTICIPLES. 

to weep, I wept, I have wept, 

to whip, I whipt, " whipt. 

109. The greater part of these verbs have become 
irregular by the bad practice of abbreviating or shorten- 
ing in writing. We are always given to cut our words 
short ; and, with very few exceptions, you find people 
writing lovel, movd, waited; instead of loved, moved, 
walked. They wish to make the pen correspond with the 
tongue ; but they ought not then to write the word the 
at full length, nor the word of. nor any other little word ; 
for scarcely ever are these words fully sounded in speak- 
ing. From lovely movd, waited, it is very easy to slide 
into lovt, movt, wallet. And this has been the case with 
regard to curst, dealt, dwelt, leapt, helpt, and many others 
in the last inserted list. It is just as proper to s&jjumpt, 
as it is to say leapt; and just as proper to say w edict as 
either ; and thus we might go on, till the orthography of 
the whole language were changed. When the love of 
contraction came to operate on such Verbs as to hurst and 
to light, it found such a clump of consonants already at the 
end of the words that it could add none. It could not en- 
able the organs even of English speech to pronounce 
burst el, light' el. It therefore made really short work of it, 
and, dropping the last syllable altogether, wrote burst and 
light in the past time and passive participle. But is it not 
more harmonious, as well as more correct, to say, u the 
bubble is almost bursted." than it is to say, "The bubble 
is almost burst? " And as to heing, is it not better to say 
hanged than hung ? " I will be hanged if I do," is a very 
common phrase, and is it not better than it would be to 
say, "I will be hung if I do ! " Many of these Verbs, by 
being very difficult to contract, have, as in the case of to 
hang, to swing, and the like, reduced the shorteners to 
the necessity of changing almost all the letters of the 



Of Verbs. 73 

words ; as, to dare, durst / but is it not better to say I 
dared than. I durst? This habit of contracting or short- 
ening is a very mischievous habit. It leads to the de- 
struction of all propriety in the use of letters ; and instead 
of a saving of time, it produces, by the puzzling that it 
gives rise to, a great loss of time. Hoping that what I 
have here said will be a warning to you against the cutting 
of words short, I have only to add, on the subject of ir- 
regular verbs, that those in the last list are to be used in 
the regular form, and that the only real irregulars are 
those of the first list. Nay, I have, after all, left some 
Verbs in the first list which may be used in the regular 
form ; as, past, which may be, in the participle, passed, and 
with full as much propriety. 

The fact that this second series of verbs, which Cobbett declares 
ought to be used in the regular form, are now almost all used in 
that form, is a pretty good proof of the soundness of his judgment. 
There is a strong tendenc} 1 " now-a-days to make irregular verbs 
regular, as well as to make irregularly-pronounced words regular. 
Mr. White is singular in his notions on this subject. He dislikes all 
departures from old-established pronunciations ; calls them ' ' book- 
talk, not free, manly speech/' Though the people of the town of 
Derby, for instance, pronounce the name of their town just as it is 
speUed, he thinks the aristocratic pronunciation "Darby" is the 
proper one, because it has support in other words pronounced in the 
old style, such as dark for clerk, clargyloY clergy, sarjeant for Serjeant. 
And yet he seems to agree with Walker that vurgin and vurtue 
instead of virgin and virtue have ' ' a grossness approaching to vul- 
garity ! " Is not the one just as bad as the other ? nay, worse ; for 
the i in these words, like that in thirst and girl, has, in everybody's 
mouth, something of the sound of the u. Ought we, in order 
to satisfy a peculiarity or nicety of taste, to retain an irregular 
pronunciation in particular words, which gives endless trouble to 
thousands of teachers and millions of children? I am all the more 
surprised at this peculiar notion of Mr. White's, as he seems willing 
to abolish every change in the ending of words in order to simplify 
the grammar : even the m in whom he is willing to discard. There is 
no use in talking about it ; it is quite natural that a practical, pro- 
gressive, reading people like the Americans should pronounce 
words as they are spelled. We no longer hear housewife pro- 
4 



74 Etymology 

nounced huzzif, as in England ; or, haunt pronounced hant. Nor 
do I think there is any loss whatever, but a gain, in so pro- 
nouncing. "Derby" sounds just as good as " Darby;" "clerk" 
as good as "dark;" "Berkeley" as "Barkeley." 

Simplicity is, in fact, the order of the day ; it is the tendency of 
the age in all things ; for modern progress, modern ideas, are ren- 
dering all mankind more neighborly, more brotherly, more 
nearly akin to each other. Mr. White is inclined to think that 
those we call irregular verbs are the real strong ones, and the 
others the weak. I notice that my little girl, five years old, fre- 
quently makes irregular verbs regular (I drinked, I eated, etc.), 
although she never hears them so used. This to me is a proof 
that there is a natural tendency in the language to regularity of 
construction. And indeed there is a reason for this change, as for 
all changes, in our language — a satisfactory, a compensatory 
reason : for most of the old irregular forms are needed for other 
and different service : they are wanted for qualificative and figura- 
tive use. Let us take some of these very verbs in the second list — 
to burn, to chide, to gild, to gird, to hew, to load, to shave, to 
spill, to weave — and we shall see that though used in the regular 
form as verbs, the ieeegulae foem is used as adjectives. I 
burned the cork; here is burnt cork; — he chided the children; 
there they go, like a chidden train; — she gilded the faces of the 
sleepers ; she wears gilt lace ; — he girded himself for the combat ; 
here is a sea-girt isle ; — he hewed the stone ; here is a temple built 
of hewn stone ; and so on. Though we speak of having worked 
hard, of having melted the ice, and of having swelled the tide of 
prosperity, yet we speak of wrought iron, of a swollen flood, and 
of molten lead. Though we say that ' ' she knitted the stockings " 
and "he freighted the vessel," we say that "her brows were knit " 
and "the enterprise was fraught with misfortune." Thus we see 
that the irregular form of the verb has been turned into an adjec- 
tive, and the regular form retained as a verb. 

The old form is also needed to form nouns as well as adjectives. 
"During the past year, he has often passed me without a glance; 
but, never mind; the past is forgotten." And the old form is 
sometimes used to show a difference of meaning as compared with 
the regular form; for "he durst not do it" is quite a different 
thing from "he dared not do it;" the former indicating that he 
had not the permission to do it, and the latter that he had not the 
courage. — Having forgotten what Cobbett said above of the verb 
to pass, I struck it out of the list of irregulars, as it is never now 



Of Verbs. 75 

used irregularly. Otherwise I should have let it stand. It is, 
however, the only verb I did strike out. 

110. Auxiliary Veebs. — In the present Letter, para- 
graph 103, I opened this part of my subject. The word 
let is the past time and the passive participle of the Verb 
to let. It is used as an auxiliary, however, in the present 
time; and only in the imperative mode; as, Let me go; 
let us go; let him go. That is to say, Leave me to go, 
leave us to go, leave him to go. Perhaps the meaning, 
fully expressed, would be, Act in such a way that I may 
be left to go, or suffered to go. 

The peculiarity of this verb to let is, that like a dozen other irreg- 
ular verbs, it may be used in all the tenses without undergoing any 
change of f orm ; as, I let him come now ; I let him come yesterday ; 
I have let him come. I pat it away now ; I put it away yesterday ; 
I have put it away. So with cut, cast, hit, and others. 

111. TJie auxiliary do, which, for the past time, be- 
comes did, is part of the Verb to do, which in its past 
time is did, and in its passive participle done. In this 
sense, it is not an auxiliary, but a principal Verb, and its 
meaning is equal to that of to execute, or to perform; as, 
I do my work, I execute my loork, I perform my work. 
As an auxiliary or helper, it seems to denote the time of 
the principal Verb ; as, I do walk ; I did walk ; and, we 
may say, I do execute my toork, or, I do do my work. In 
this last example, the first do is an auxiliary, and the last 
do a principal Verb. However, as I said before, do and 
did, used as auxiliaries, do a great deal more than merely- 
express time. In fact, they are not often used for that 
purpose only. They are used for the purpose of affirming 
or denying in a manner peculiarly strong ; as, I do work, 
means, that I work, notwithstanding all that may be, or 
may have been said, or thought, to the contrary; or it 
means, that I work noic, and have not done it at some 
other stated or supposed time. It is the same, with the 
exception of time, as to the use of did. These are 



76 Etymology 

amongst those little words of vast import, the proper 
force and use of which foreigners scarcely ever learn, and 
which we learn from our very infancy. 

This is, I think, the proper place to state that the English verb 
has, in fact, jive forms in the present tense — something which, I 
believe, is not found in the verbs of any other modern tongue : 

He works, common form. 

He is working, progressive form. 

He does work, emphatic form. 

He worketh, solemn form. 

He doth work, solemn emphatic form. 

All these forms convey a different shade of meaning, and are 
used under different circumstances, which will be explained by- 
and-by. I will only say here that the first three are the most fre- 
quently used. The French and the Germans have only one form 
for the whole five : il travaille, er arbeitet. They have, it is true, 
the progressive form, too, but it is seldom used by the French and 
hardly ever by the Germans. 

Now, concerning do, you must notice that, as an auxiliary, it is 
used chiefly in negative and inteeeogative sentences : 

He works, he is working, affirmative. 

He does not work, negative. 

Does he work ? interrogative. 
It is never used in affirmative sentences except for emphasis. 
The French and the Germans, for the last two forms, simply say : 
He works not, Works he ? We use this form when we speak sol- 
emnly or earnestly : He works not ; He comes not ; I see him not. 
Notice that when any other auxiliary is used (have, be, must, may, 
etc.), we cannot use do in either negative or interrogative sentences : 
" I have not seen him. He must not go. Am I your friend? May 
I speak?" To say, therefore, "I did not have a penny," is not so 
good as, "I had not a penny." 

112. The Verbs to have and to be are the two great 
auxiliaries. These words demand an extraordinary por- 
tion of your attention. They are principal Verbs as well 
as auxiliaries. The Verb to have, as a principal Verb, 
signifies possession ; as, I have a pen, that is to say, I 
possess a pen. Then, this is a word of very great use in- 
deed in its capacity of principal Verb ; for we say, I have 
a headache, I have a hatred of such a thing, I have a 



Of Verbs. 77 

mind to go; and hundreds of similar phrases. I possess 
a headache has the same meaning ; but the other is more 
agreeable to the natural turn of our language. As aux 
iliary, this Verb is absolutely necessary in forming what 
are called the compound times of other Verbs, and those 
times are called compound because they are formed of two 
or more Verbs. Suppose the subject to be of my worki?ig, 
and that I want to tell you that my work is ended, that I 
have closed my work, I cannot, in a short manner, tell you 
this without the help of the Verb to have. To say, Itcork, 
or J worked, or J will work ; these will not answer my 
purpose. No : I must call in the help of the Verb to have, 
and tell you I have worked. So, in the case of the past 
time, I must say, I had worked; in the future, I shall 
have worked ; in the subjunctive mode, I must say, I may, 
might, could, or should have worked. If you reflect a 
little, you will find a clear reason for employing the Verb 
to have in this way; for when I say, "I have worked," my 
words amount to this : that the act of working is now in 
my possession. It is completed. It is a thing I own, and 
therefore I say, I have it. 

113. The Verb to be signifies existence, when used as a 
principal Verb. " To be ill, to be well, to be rich, to be 
poor," mean to exist in illness, in health, in riches, in pov- 
erty. This Verb, in its compound times, requires the help 
of the Verb to have ; as, I have been, I had been, I shall 
have been, and so on. As auxiliary, this Verb is used 
with the participles of other Verbs ; as, to be working, he 
is working, it is worked. Now you will perceive, if you 
reflect, that these phrases mean as follows: existing in 
work, he exists in work, it exists hi a worked state. Both 
these Verbs are sometimes used, at one and the same 
time, as auxiliaries to other principal Verbs/ as, I have 
been writing ; I have been imprisoned ; and so on; and, 
upon patient attention to what has already been said, you 
will find that they retain upon all occasions their full 



78 Etymology 

meaning, of possession in the one case, and of existence in 
the other. 

114. Now, my dear James, if I have succeeded in mak- 
ing clear to you, the principle out of which the use of 
these words, as auxiliaries, has arisen, I have accomplished 
a great deal ; for, if well grounded in that principle, all 
the subsequent difficulties will speedily vanish before you. 

115. I now proceed to close this long and important 
Letter, by presenting to you the conjugation of these two 
Verbs, both of which are irregular, and every irregularity 
is worthy of your strict attention. 

INFINITIVE MODE. 
To Have. 

INDICATIVE MODE. 
Singular. Plural. 

1st Person. I have, We have. 



ri st Jrerson. i nave, w e nave. 

T w nt \ 2d Person. Thou hast, You have. 

(3d Person. He, she, or it has They have, 



Time. 



s — I had, or hath], We had. 

Ttoe K ~ Thou hadst ' You ha(L 

( — He, she or it had, They had. 

Futur ( — * sna ^> or "^1 have, We shall, or will have. 

Time. 1 — Thou shalt, or wilt have, You shall, or will have. 

( — He, she, or it shall or will They shall, or will have, 
have], 

SUBJUNCTIVE MODE. 

flf I have, or may, might, could, or should have. 

I If thou have, or may " u " have. 

Present I If he, she, or it have, or may " have. 

Time. ) jf we naV e, or may " " have; 

| If you have, or may " " have. 

L If they have, or may " " have. 

IMPERATIVE MODE. 
Let me have, Let us have. 

Have thou, Have you. 

Let him, her, or it have, Let them have. 



Of Verbs. 



79 



PARTICIPLES. 
Active. — Having. 
Passive. — Had. 

116. Though I have inserted hath in the third person 
singular of the present of the indicative, it is hardly ever 
used. It is out of date, and ought to be wholly laid 
aside. 

117. The Verb to be is still more irregular, but a little 
attention to its irregularities will prevent all errors in the 
use of it. 



Present 
Time. 



Past 
Time. 



Future 
Time. 



Singular. 
/lst Person. 
■s 2d Person. 
(3d Person. 



iNPiisnTiyE mode. 

To Be. 
ESTDICATIYE MODE. 

I am, 

Thou art, 

He, she, or it is, 



/ — I was, 

■< — Thou wast, 

( — He, she, or it was, 

/ — I shall, or will be, 

s — Thou shalt, or wilt be, 

( — He, she, or it shall, or will be, 



Plural. 
We are. 
You are. 
They are. 
We were. 
You were. 
They were. 
We shall, or will be. 
You shall, or will be. 
They shall, or will be. 



Present 
Time. 



SUBJUNCTIVE MODE, 
f If I be, or may, might, would, could, or should be. 

I If thou be, or may " " i( " be. 

J If he, she, or it be, or may " " be. 

i If we be, or may " " " be. 

| If you be, or may " " " be. 

I If they be, or may " " " be. 
f If I were. 
I If thou were. 

Past Time. \ If he > she ' or jt were ' 



I If we were. 
| If you were. 
If they were. 



I 



80 Etymology 

IMPERATIVE MODE. 

Let me be, Let us be. 

Be thou, Be you. 

Let him, her, or it, be, Let them be. 

PARTICIPLES. 

Present. — Being. 
Past. — Been. 

118. In the Subjunctive Mode I have made use of 
the conjunction if throughout all the conjugations of 
Verbs. But a Verb may be in that mode without an if 
before it. The if is only one of the marks of that mode. 
A Verb is always in that mode when the action or state of 
being expressed by the Verb is expressed conditionally, 
or when the action or state of being is, in some way or 
other, dependent on some other action or state of being. 
But of this I shall speak more at large when I come to 
the Syntax of Verbs. 

119. There remain a few words to be said about the 
signs, the defective Verbs, and the impersonal Verbs. The 
signs, may, might, can, could, will, woidd, shall, should, 
and mast, have all, originally, been Verbs, though they 
are now become defective in almost all their parts, and 
serve only as signs to other Verbs. Will, indeed, is part 
of a regular Verb ; as, to will, they willed, they are willing, 
they icill be willing. The word woidd is certainly the 
past time and passive participle of the same Verb ; and, 
indeed, it is used as a principal Verb now, in certain cases ; 
as, "I would he were rich. 1 ' That is to say, I desire, or 
am willing, or, it is my vnll, that he shoidd be rich. But 
deep inquiries regarding the origin of these words are 
more curious than useful. A mere idea of the nature of 
their origin is enough. The Verb ought is a Verb de- 
fective, in most of its parts. It certainly, however, is no 
other than a part of the Verb to owe, and is become ought 
by corruption. For instance ; u 1 ought to write to you," 



Of Verbs. 81 

means that " I owe the performance of the act of writing 
to you." Ought is made use of only in the present time, 
and for that reason a great deal has been lost to our lan- 
guage by this corruption. As to the Verbs which some 
grammarians have called impersonal, there are, in fact, no 
such things in the English language. By impersonal 
Verb is meant a Verb that has no noun or pronoun for its 
nominative case ; no person or thing that is the actor, or 
receiver of an .action, or that is in being. Thus: "it 
rai7is" is by some called an impersonal Verb; but the 
pronoun it represents the person. Look again at Letter 
VI, and at paragraphs 60 and 61. You will there find 
what it is that this it, in such cases, represents. 

120. Thus I have concluded my Letter on the Ety- 
mology of Verbs, which is by far the most important part 
of the subject. Great as have been my endeavors to 
make the matter clear to you, I am aware, that, after the 
first reading of this Letter, your mind will be greatly 
confused. You will have had a glimpse at everything in 
the Letter, but will have seen nothing clearly. But, my 
dear James, lay the book aside for a day or two; then 
read the whole Letter again and again. Bead it early, 
while your mind is clear, and while sluggards are snoring. 
Write it down. Lay it aside for another day or two. 
Copy your own writing. Think as you proceed ; and, at 
the end of your copying, you will understand clearly all 
the contents of the Letter. Do not attempt to study the 
Letter piece by piece. In your readings, as well as in 
your copyings, go clean throughout. If you follow these 
instructions, the remaining part of your task will be very 
easy and pleasant. 

As to this last piece of advice, I cannot agree with Cobbett. 
Reading the whole letter at once is the veiy way to get a confused 
impression of the whole subject; just as going through a whole 
museum at once leaves a confused impression of everything and a 
distinct impression of nothing. No ; go through one roomful of 



82 



JEtyynology 



curiosities at one visit ; master the whole collection step by step ; 
and when you have got it pretty clear in your mind, then you may 
go over it all at one run. 

To complete this, the most important part of etymology, I must 
give you a full view of a passive verb, or rather of a verb in the 
passive voice. Just devote one little half-hour to it in the early 
morning, when your mind is fresh ; and you will see its nature 
clearly ; compare it with the same verb in the active voice, and 
you will get a fair idea of what a verb in the passive voice is. 
For, to make the matter all the more plain, I see no reason why 
this same verb to work, which I have given you in the active voice, 
should not be given in the passive, too ; for we often say, He is 
worked to death; the mine was well worked; the problem has been 
worked out, and so on. Besides — and this is a secret which every 
school-boy does not know — there must, in the conjugation of every 
passive verb, be displayed a complete conjugation of the verb to be; 
so here we kill two birds with one stone. 



Complete Conjugation of the Passive Verb To be worked : 
INFINITIVE MOOD. 



SIMPLE TENSES. 

Present tense. 
To be worked. 


COMPOUND TENSES. 

Present perfect tense. 
To have been worked. 


INDICATIVE MOOD. 


Present tense. 
I am worked, 
Thou art worked, 
He is " 
We are ■" 
You are " 
They are " 


Present perfect tense. 
I have been worked. 
Thou hast been worked. 
He has been " 
We have been " 
You have been " 
They have been " 


Past tense. 
I was worked, 
Thou wast worked, 
He was lt 
We were " 
You were " 
They were " 


Past perfect tense. 
I had been worked. 
Thou hadst been worked. 
He had been 
We had been " 
You had been " 
They had been " 


Simple future tense. 
I shall be worked, 
Thou wilt be worked, 
He will be " 
We shall be " 
You will "be " 
They will be " 


Perfect future tense. 
I shall have been worked. 
Thou wilt have been worked. 
He will have been 
We shall have been " 
You will have been hi 
They will have been M 


Present conditional form. 
I should be worked, 
Thou wouldst be worked, 
He would be " 
We should be " 
You would be " 
They would be " 


Perfect conditional form. 
I should have been worked. 
Thou wouldst have been worked. 
He would have been 
We should have been 
You would have been 
They would have been " 



Of Adverbs 



83 



POTENTIAL MOOD. 



Present tense. 
I may he worked, 
Thou mayst be worked, 
He may be 
We may be 
You may be 
They may be " 

Past tense. 
I might be worked, 
Thou mightst be worked, 
He might be 
We might be " 

You might be 
They might be " 



Present perfect tense. 
I may have been worked. 
Thou mayst have been worked. 
He may have been 
We may have been 
You may have been " 

They may have been " 

Past perfect tense. 
I might have been worked. 
Thou mightst have been worked. 
He might have been 
We might have been 
You might have been 
They might have been " 



SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD. 



Present tense. 
If I be worked. 

thou be worked, 

he be 

we be 

you be 

they be " 

Past tense. 
If I were worked, 

thou were worked, 

he were 

we were " 

you were " 

they were 



Be worked, 



Present perfect tense. 
If I have been worked. 

thou have been worked. 

he have been 

we have been " 

you have been M 

they have been " 

Past perfect tense, 
If I had been worked. 

thou had been " 

he had been v 

we had been " 

you had been " 

they had been " 



IMPERATIVE MOOD, 
or, 



Be thou worked. 



PARTICIPLES. 
Present— Being worked, Past— Having been worked. 



LETTER IX. 



ETYMOLOGY OF ADVERBS. 



121. In Letter m, and in paragraphs 27 and 28, you 
will find a description of this Part of Speech. Read 
again those two paragraphs, in order to refresh your 
memory. There is not much to be said about Adverbs 
under the head of Etymology. They are words liable to 
few variations. Adverbs are very numerous, and may be 
divided into five principal classes : that is to say, Adverbs 
of time, of place, of order, of quality, and of manner. 



84 JEtymology 

« 
This last class, which is the most numerous, is composed of 
those which are derived immediately from adjectives, and 
which end in ly; as, especially, particularly, thankfully. 

122. These Adverbs, ending in ly, are, for the most 
part, formed by simply adding ly to the adjective; as, es- 
pecial becomes especially; but if the adjective end in y, 
that y is changed into i in forming the Adverb ; as, happy, 
happily/ steady, steadily. If the adjective end in le, 
the e is dropped in forming the Adverb; as, possible, 
liossibly. 

123. Some few Adverbs have degrees of comparison ; 
as, often, oftener, oftenest ; and those which are derived 
from irregular adjectives are irregular in forming their 
degrees of comparison ; as, well, better, best. 

124. Some Adverbs are simple or single ; others com- 
pound. The former consist of one word, the latter of 
two or more words; as, happily ; at present ; now-a-days ; 
which last means at the days that ?ioio are. Another Ad- 
verb of this description is, by-and-by ; which is used to 
express, in a short time ; and literally it means near and 
near ; because by itself, as an Adverb, means near, close, 
beside. When Adverbs are compound, the words com- 
posing them ought to be connected by a hyphen, or 
hyphens, as in the above examples of now-a-days and 
by-and-by. 

I must here explain to you two important things, of which Cob- 
bett makes no mention : the phkase and the clause. In the sen- 
tence, "I shall return immediately" the word immediately is 
simply an adverb of time, modifying the verb shall return; but 
when I change the adverb into several words, as, "I shall return in 
an instant" it becomes a phkase, an adverbial phrase. Phrases are 
used to express all that adverbs are used to express, and nearly all 
adverbs can be turned into adverbial phrases. The adverb now 
may be changed into at this moment or at present; beautifully may 
be rendered by in a beautiful manner ; here may be turned into at 
this place; in a quiet way may be rendered by quietly ; and so on. 
And here I must show you that there are many cases where we 



Of Adverbs. 85 

prefer the adverbial phrase to the adverb. To what part of speech 
do you think the words silly, kindly, friendly, belong ? They look 
like adverbs, do they not? But they are not, as you will find by 
trial: a silly boy, a kindly gentleman, a friendly lady. Shall I 
then say, The boy speaks sillily? The gentleman acts kindlily? 
The lady received us f riendlily ? These expressions are not abso- 
lutely incorrect; they are better than with the adjective, The boy 
speaks silly, etc. ; but they do not sound agreeable ; so we prefer 
the adverbial phrase : The boy speaks in a silly manner ; the gen- 
tleman acts in a kindly manner ; the lady received us in a friendly 
manner, or in a friendly way. Observe, too, that you ought never 
to put a preposition before an adverb of place ; as, to here, from 
there. You must use a phrase, and say, to this place, from that 
city, etc., always naming the place referred to. Never say from 
whence, from thence; but simply whence, thence. 

Now for the clause. The difference between the phrase and the 
clause is this : the clause always has a subject and predicate (nom- 
inative and verb), the phrase never has either. "I shall return 
when I please." Here, instead of the phrase in an instant, we have 
an assertion, with subject (I) and predicate (please), which cannot 
be changed for a single word. This is called an adverbial clause ; 
adverbial because it modifies the verb of the first clause ; for the 
sentence now contains two clauses, and is changed from a simple 
into a complex sentence. Every sentence must have at least one 
clause, while there may not be a single phrase in ten consecutive 
sentences. A clause may be not only adverbial, but objective, 
participial, infinitive, or relative. "He asked what I was doing y' 
objective clause; "He came in as I was going away," participial 
clause; " He wants to see what will come of it," infinitive clause; 
"The boy who learns English is my son," relative clause; and 
so on. Observe the following three examples, and you will sec 
how the adverb may be turned into an adverbial phrase, and the 
latter into an adverbial clause : 

Speak distinctly. 

Speak in a distinct manner. 

Speak so that you may be understood. 
It is worth noticing that some adverbs help to join clauses as well 
as to express time or place, and are therefore called conjunctive ad- 
verbs : I shall return when he returns. I will tell you where we are 
going. Others, again, express negation, affirmation, or cause, 
and are called adverbs of negation, of affirmation, or of cause ; as, 
(1) no, not, neve?'; (2) yes, yea, truly, certainly; (3) why, wlierefore, 



86 Etymology 

therefore. JVo, coming immediately before a noun, is, of course, an 
adjective ; as, No person under 25 years of age can become a mem- 
ber of Congress. Observe that all adverbs ending in ly are com- 
pared with more and most, or less and least ; as, handsomely, more 
handsomely, most handsomely; — handsomely, less handsomely, 
least handsomely. Do you remember the names of these three 
degrees ? 



LETTEE X. 

ETYMOLOGY OF PREPOSITIONS. 

125. Letter III, paragraphs 29 and 30, has taught you 
of what description of words Prepositions are. The 
chief use of them is to express the different relations or 
connections which nouns have with each other, or in 
which nouns stand with regard to each other ; as, John 
gives money to Peter; Peter receives money from John. 
It is useless to attempt to go into curious inquiries as to 
the origin of Prepositions. They never change their 
endings; they are always written in the same manner. 
Their use is the main thing to be considered ; and that 
will become very clear to you, when you come to the 
Syntax. 

126. There are two abbreviations, or shortenings, of 
Prepositions, which I will notice here, because they are 
in constant use, and may excite doubts in your mind. 
These are a and o' / as, I am a hunting ; he is a coming ; 
it is one o'clock. The a thus added is at, without doubt ; 
as, I am at hunting ; he is at coming. Generally this is 
a vulgar and redundant manner of speaking ; but it is in 
use. In mercantile accounts you will frequently see this 
a made use of in a very odd sort of way ; as, " Six bales 
marked 1 a 6." The merchant means, " Six bales marked 
from 1 to 6." But this I take to be a relic of the Norman 
French, which was once the law and mercantile language 



Of Prepositions. 87 

of England ; for, in French, a with an accent, means to or 
at. I wonder that merchants, who are generally men of 
sound sense, do not discontinue the use of this mark of 
affectation. And, I beg you, my dear James, to bear in 
mind, that the only use of words is to cause our meaning 
to be clearly understood ; and that the best words are 
those which are familiar to the ears of * the greatest num- 
ber of persons. The o' with the mark of elision means 
of or of the, or on, or on the ; as, two o'clock, which is the 
same as to say two of the clock, or two according to the 
clock, or two on the clock. 

127. As to the Prepositions which are joined to verbs 
or other words; as, to outlive, to undervalue, to be over- 
done, it would be to waste our time to spend it in any 
statements about them; for these are other words than 
to live, to value, to be done. If we were to go, in this 
way, into the subject of the composition of words, where 
should we stop? Thankful, thankless, witho^, wittu;i/ 
these are all compound words, but, of what use to us to 
enter on, and spend our time in, inquiries of mere curio- 
sity ? It is for monks and for Fellows of English colleges, 
who live by the sweat of other people's brows, to spend 
their time in this manner, and to call the result of their 
studies learning / for you, who will have to earn what 
you eat and what you drink and what you wear, it is to 
avoid everything that tends not to real utility. 

It may, however, not be quite useless to mention the names 
given to the parts of derived words. Kind, un-kind, kind-ness. 
The original word is called the root; the syllable placed before the 
root is called the prefix; and the syllable added to the root is 
called the suffix. Although any word having a prefix or a suffix 
may be called a compound word, we generally call those words 
compound which are formed by uniting two or more whole words ; 
as, workshop, schoolmaster, army-chest. And as to which com- 
pound words take a hyphen, and which do not, this depends a 
good deal upon the shape of the first and the last letter of the two 
words united. For instance, churchyard needs no hyphen, because 



88 Etymology 

the two parts are sufficiently separated by the ascending h and the 
descending y ; but church-bell or church-hymn must be so separated, 
because the parts of the word would otherwise not be sufficiently 
distinct. 

As to the correct use of prepositions generally, there is no guide 
equal to the feeling for propriety acquired by much reading and 
speaking, and by frequent hearing of good speakers. Well do I 
remember that, among my most advanced scholars in Germany, 
almost the only mistake they finally made was in the use of the 
prepositions, showing that this was the last difficulty to be mas- 
tered. It was sometimes a matter so peculiar, so delicate, so diffi- 
cult to choose the right preposition, that I was myself obliged to 
repeat a sentence aloud several times before I could hit on the 
right word. 

Do not forget that the preposition governs the objective case — I 
send fw him— nor that the same word may sometimes belong to 
another part of speech : I send for him, for I cannot do without 
him. Notice that people are said to be in any place, but that they 
go into a place. We are in the garden, we are going into the 
house. In the Broadway stages there stands, over the fare-box, 
this sentence : " Put the exact fare in the box." It should be into 
the box; for, though the money may be in the box, it is put into 
it. — Do not suppose that every preposition must be a little word; 
for concerning, respecting, regarding, notwithstanding are also prepo- 
sitions. Observe, too, that nine phrases out of ten begin with a 
preposition. 

In regard to the expressions, a-hunting, a-coming, and the like, 
Cobbett does not mean that these are vulgar and redundant, — 
which is what, at first, I thought he meant, — but that at hunting, 
at coming, are so. The other expression is perfectly legitimate, 
and used by the best authors. You may say, therefore, that some- 
thing or anything is a-doing, a-making, a-building, a-ripening, 
a-brewing, and so on. 



Of Conjunctions. 89 

LETTEE XI. 

ETYMOLOGY OF CONJUNCTIONS. 

128. In Letter III, paragraph 31, you have had a de- 
scription of this sort of words, and also some account of 
the uses of them. Some of them are called copulative 
Conjunctions, and others disjunctive. They all serve to 
join together words, or parts of sentences ; but the for- 
mer express an union in the actions, or states of being, 
expressed by the verb ; as, you and I talk. The latter a 
disunion ; as, you talk, but I act. The words of this 
Part of Speech never vary in their endings. They are 
always spelled in one and the same way. In themselves 
they present no difficulty ; but, as you will see by-and-by, 
to use them properly, with other words, in the forming 
of sentences, demands a due portion of your attention 
and care. 

You see Cobbett says "an union." Can you tell why this is 
wrong ? If not, look at Letter IV, paragraph 36 (note). 



LETTEE XII. 
cautionary remarks. 

My dear James : 

129. Before we enter on Syntax, let me give you a 
caution or two with regard to the contents of the forego- 
ing Letters. 

130. There are some words which, under different cir- 
cumstances belong to more than one Part of Speech, as, 
indeed, you have seen in the Participles. But this is by 
no means confined to that particular description of words. 



90 Cautionary Remarks, 

I act. Here act is a verb ; but " the act performed by me" 
shows the very same word in the capacity of a noun. The 
message was sent by him ; he stood by at the time. In 
the first of these examples by is a preposition ; in the last 
an adverb. Mind, therefore, that it is the sense in which 
the toord is used, and not the letters of which it is com- 
posed, that determines what is the Part of Speech to 
which it belongs. 

131. Never attempt to get by rote any part of your in- 
structions. Whoever falls into that practice soon begins 
to esteem the powers of memory more than those of rea- 
son ; and the former are despicable indeed when com- 
pared with the latter. When the fond parents of an 
eighth wonder of the world call him forth into the middle 
of the parlor to repeat to their visitors some speech of a 
play, how angry would they be if any one were to tell 
them that their son's endowments equalled those of a 
parrot or a bullfinch ! Yet a German bird-teacher would 
make either of these more perfect in this species of 
oratory. It is this mode of teaching, which is practised 
in the great schools, that assists very much in making 
dunces of lords and country squires. They " get their 
lessons ;" that is to say, they repeat the words of it ; but, 
as to its sense and meaning, they seldom have any under- 
standing. This operation is sometimes, for what reason 
I know not, called getting a thing by heart. It must, I 
should think, mean by hearH ; that is to say, by hear it. 
That a person may get and retain and repeat a lesson in 
this way, without any effort of the mind, is very clear 
from the fact, of which we have daily proof, that people 
sing the words and the tune of a song with perfect cor- 
rectness, at the very time that they are most seriously 
thinking and debating in their minds about matters of 
great importance to them. 

132. I have cautioned you before against studying the 
foregoing instructions piecemeal; that is to say, a little 



Cautionary Remarks. 91 

bit at a time. Read a letter all through at once; and, 
now that you have come to the end of my instructions on 
Etymology, read all the Letters through at once : do this 
repeatedly; taking care to proceed slowly and carefully; 
and, at the end of a few days, all the matters treated of 
will form a connected whole in your mind. 

133. Before you proceed to the Syntax, try yourself a 
little, thus : Copy a short sentence from any book. Then 
write down the words, one by one, and write against each 
what Part of Speech you think it belongs to. Then look 
for each word in the dictionary, where you will find the 
several Parts of Speech denoted by little letters after the 
word: s. is for substantive, or noun; pro. for pronoun; 
a. for article ; v. a. for verb active ; v. n. for verb neuter ; 
adj. for adjective; adv. for adverb; pre. for preposition; 
con. for conjunction; int. for interjection. It will give 
you great pleasure and encouragement when you find that 
you are right. If you be sometimes wrong, this jvill only 
urge you to renewed exertion. You will be proud to see 
that, without any one at your elbow, you have really 
acquired something which you can never lose. Tou will 
begin, and with reason, to think yourself learned; your 
sight, though the objects will still appear a good deal 
confused, will dart into every part of the science ; and 
you will pant to complete what you will be convinced you 
have successfully begun. 

This is Mr. White's much-ridiculed and thoroughly-despised 
parsing exercise. Of course, carried on as it is at the public- 
schools, with little or no real understanding of the matter, and 
with a kind of rapid, mechanical, parrot-like repetition of gram- 
matical terms, it is worse than useless. But I am convinced 
that, properly considered, and understanding^ carried out, this 
exercise is of positive value. To a boy or girl of proper age, it 
may be made indeed, tolerably interesting. Let us look at a 
single little sentence. "Boys love swimming." 

Boys is a common noun, third person, plural number, masculine 
gender, nominative case. 



92 Syntax Generally Considered. 

Love is a regular transitive verb, active voice, third person, 
plural number, present tense, indicative mood. 

Swimming is a common (or participial) noun, third person, sin- 
gular number, objective case. 

Now, take each one of these definitions, and asks<%? and if 
you can answer properly, then the exercise has become of real and 
substantial benefit to you. Why a common noun? Because it is a 
general name, and not a particular one. Why third person? Be- 
cause it is spoken of. Why plural number? Because it means 
more than one. Why masculine gender ? Because it is the name 
of males. Why nominative case? Because it is the subject of the 
sentence; and so on. If I had said, " Boys love to swim," the ob- 
ject, to swim, would be called a verbal noun. 



LETTER XIII. 

syntax generally considered, 

My dear James: 

134. In Letter II, paragraph 9, I shortly explained to 
you the meaning of the word Syntax, as that word is used 
in the teaching of grammar. Read that paragraph again. 

135. We are, then, now entering upon this branch of 
your study; and it is my object to teach you how to give 
all the words you make use of their proper situation when 
you come to put them into sentences. Because, though 
every word that you make use of may be correctly spelled ; 
that is to say, may have all the letters in it that it ought 
to have, and no more than it ought to have ; and though 
all the words may, at the same time, be the fit words to 
use in order to express what you wish to express ; yet, 
for want of a due observance of the principles and rules 
of Syntax, your sentences may be incorrect, and, in some 
cases, they may not express what you wish them to 
express. 

136. I shall, however, carry my instructions a little 



Syntax. 93 

further than the construction of independent sentences. 
I shall make some remarks upon the manner of putting 
sentences together; and on the things necessary to be 
understood, in order to enable a person to write a series 
of sentences. These remarks will show you the use of 
figurative language, and will, I hope, teach you how to 
avoid the very common error of making your writing con- 
fused and unintelligible. 



LETTEE XIV. 

SYNTAX. 

The Points and Marks made use of in Writing. 
My dear James: 

137. There are, as I informed you in paragragh 9, Let- 
ter II, Points made use of in the making, or writing, 
of sentences ; and, therefore, we must first notice these ; 
because, as you will soon see, the sense, or meaning, of 
the words is very much dependent upon the points which 
are used along with the words. For instance : "You will 
be rich if you be industrious, in a few years." Then 
again : " You will be rich, if you be industrious in a few 
years" Here, though in both sentences the words and 
also the order of the words are precisely the same, the 
meaning of one of the sentences is very different from 
that of the other. The first sentence means that you will, 
in a feto years' time, be rich, if you be industrious ?iovj. 
The second sentence means that you will be rich, some 
time or other, if you be industrious in a few years from 
this time. And all this great difference in meaning is, as 
you must see, produced solely by the difference in the 
situation of the comma. Put another comma after the 
last word industrious, and the meaning becomes dubious. 



94 Syntax. 

A memorable proof of the great importance of attending 
to Points was given to the English nation in the year 
1817. A committee of the House of Lords made a report 
to the House, respecting certain political clubs. A secre- 
tary of one of those clubs presented a petition to the 
House, in which he declared positively, and offered to 
prove at the bar, that a part of the report was totally 
false. At first their Lordships blustered; their high 
blood seemed to boil; but, at last, the Chairman of the 
Committee apologized for the report by saying that there 
ought to have been a full-point where there was only a 
comma ! and that it was this which made that false which 
would otherwise have been, and which was intended to be, 
true! 

138. These Points being, then, things of so much con- 
sequence in the forming of sentences, it is necessary that 
I explain to you the use of them, before I proceed any 
farther. There are four of them: the Full-point, or 
Period ; the Colon ; the Semi-colon ; the Comma. 

139. The Pull-point is a single dot, thus [.], and it is 
used at the end of every complete sentence. That is to 
say, at the end of every collection of words which make a 
full and complete meaning, and is not necessarily con- 
nected with other collections of words. But a sentence 
may consist of several members or divisions, and then it 
is called a compound sentence. When it has no divisions, 
it is called a simple sentence. Thus: "The people suffer 
great misery." This is a simple sentence; but, "The 
people suffer great misery, and daily perish for want," is 
a compound sentence; that is to say, it is compounded, 
or made up, of two simple sentences. 

140. The Colon, which is written thus [:], is next to 
the full-point in requiring a complete sense in the words. 
It is, indeed, often used when the sense is complete, but 
when there is something still behind, which tends to make 
the sense fuller or clearer. 



Syntax. 95 

141. The Semi-colon is written thus [;], and it is used 
to set off, or divide, simple sentences, in cases when the 
comma is not quite enough to keep the meaning of the 
simple sentences sufficiently distinct. 

142. The Comma is written thus [,], and is used to 
inark the shortest pauses in reading, and the smallest 
divisions in writing. It has, by some grammarians, been 
given as a rule to use a comma to set off every part of a 
compound sentence, which part has in it a verb not in the 
infinitive mode ; and, certainly, this is, in general, proper. 
But it is not always proper; and, besides, commas are 
used, in numerous cases, to set off parts which have no 
verbs in them ; and even to set off single words which are 
not verbs ; and of this the very sentence which I am now 
writing gives you ample proof. The comma marks the 
shortest pause that we make in speaking ; and it is evi- 
dent that, in many cases, its use must depend upon taste. 
It is sometimes used to give emphasis, or weight, to the 
word after which it is put. Observe, now, the following 
two sentences: "I was very well and cheerful last week; 
but, am rather feeble and low-spirited now." "I am very 
willing to yield to your kind requests; but, I will set 
your harsh commands at defiance." Commas are made 
use of when phrases, that is to say, portions of words, 
are throwed into a sentence, and which are not absolutely 
necessary to assist in its grammatical construction. For 
instance: "There were, in the year 1817, petitions from a 
million and a half of men, who, as they distinctly alleged, 
were suffering the greatest possible hardships." The two 
phrases, in italics, may be left out in the reading, and 
still the sentence will have its full grammatical con- 
struction. 

Here Cobbett shows he made no distinction between a phrase 
and a clause. It is true that in a popular sense any number of 
words may be called a phrase ; as, " How do you do ? Good-bye/' 
But in grammar this word has a particular sense, and these last- 



96 Syntax. 

mentioned expressions do not agree with it. " In the year 1817 " is 
a phrase, and " as they distinctly alleged " is a clause, because the 
former has neither subject nor predicate and the latter has both. 
I must say, too, that at the present day no corrector for the press 
(proof-reader) would allow those commas to stand after those huts. 
Further, throwed instead of thrown is not yet in common use : but 
I am inclined to think it will soon be, just like sawed instead of 
sawn, or croioed instead of crew. 

143. Let us now take a compound sentence or two con- 
taining all the four points. " In a land of liberty it is ex- 
tremely dangerous to make a distinct order of the profes- 
sion of arms. In absolute monarchies this is necessary 
for the safety of the prince, and arises from the main 
principle of their constitution, which is that of governing 
by fear; but in free states the profession of a soldier, 
taken singly and merely as a profession, is justly an ob- 
ject of jealousy. In these states no man should take up 
arms, but witlx a view to defend his country and its laws : 
he puts off the citizen when he enters the camp : but it is 
because he is a citizen, and would continue so, that he 
makes himself for a while a soldier. The laws therefore 
and constitution of these kingdoms know no such state as 
that of a perpetual standing soldier, bred up to no other 
profession than that of war ; and it was not till the reign 
of Henry VII. that the kings of England had so much as 
a guard about their persons." This passage is taken from 
Blackstone's Commentaries, Book I. Chap. 13. Here are 
four complete sentences. The first is a simple sentence. 
The other three are compound sentences. Each of these 
latter has its members, all very judiciously set off by 
points. The word so, in the thud sentence, ought to be 
such, or the words a citizen ought to be repeated. But, 
with this trifling exception, these are very beautiful sen- 
tences. Nothing affected or confused in them : all is sim- 
ple, clear, and harinonious. 

144. You will now see that it is quite impossible to 
give any precise rides for the use of these several points. 



Syntax. 97 

Much must be left to taste : something must depend upon 
the weight which we may wish to give to particular words, 
or phrases; and something on the seriousness, or the 
levity, of the subject on which we are writing. 

145. Besides these points, however, there are certain 
grammatical signs, or marks, which are made use of in 
the writing of sentences : the mark of parenthesis, the 
mark of interrogation, the mark of exclamation, the 
apostrophe, otherwise called the mark of elision, and the 
hyphen. 

146. The mark of Parenthesis consists of two curved 
strokes, drawed across the line of writing, or of print. Its 
use is to enclose a phrase throwed in hastily to assist in 
elucidating our subject, or to add force to our assertions 
or arguments. But, observe, the parenthesis ought to be 
very sparingly used. It is necessarily an interrupter; it 
breaks in upon the regular course of the mind : it tends 
to divert the attention from the main object of the sen- 
tence. I will give you, from Mr. Tull, Chap. XIII, an 
instance of the omission of the parenthesis, and also of 
the proper employment of it. " Palladius thought also, 
with others of the ancients, that Heaven was to be fright- 
ened with red cloth, with the feathers or the heart of an 
owl, and a multitude of such ridiculous scarecrows, from 
siDoiling the fruits of the fields and gardens. The ancients 
having no rational principles, or theory of agriculture, 
placed their chief confidence in magical charms and en- 
chantments, which he, who has the patience or curiosity 
to read, may find, under the title aforementioned, in Cato, 
in Vaero {and even Columella is as fulsome as any of 
them), all written in very fine language ; which is most of 
the erudition that can be acquired as to field husbandry, 
from the Greek and Latin writers, whether in verse or 
prose." For want of the mark of parenthesis in the first 
of these sentences, we almost think, at the close of it, 
that the author is speaking of the crows, and not of 

5 



98 Syntax. 

Heaven, being frightened from spoiling the fruits of the 
fields and the gardens. But with regard to the use of 
the parenthesis, I shall speak, perhaps, more fully by- 
and-by: for the employment of it is a matter of some im- 
portance. 

It is, perhaps, worth mentioning that this word parenthesis, like 
all the words ending in u, changes the i into e in the plural : paren- 
theses, crises, theses. So that we must speak of a word or sen- 
tence being enclosed in parentheses, not parenthesis. 

147. The mark of Interrogation, which is written thus 
[?], is used when a question is asked; as, " Who has my 
pen?" u What man is that/" In these and numerous 
other cases, the mark is not necessary to our clearly com- 
prehending the meaning of the writer. But this is not 
always the case. "What does he say? Put the horse 
into the stable." Again: "What does he say? Put the 
horse into the stable ?" In speaking, this great difference 
in the meaning, in this instance, would be fully expressed 
by the voice and manner of the speaker ; but, in writing, 
the inark of interrogation is, you see, absolutely necessary 
in order to accomplish the purpose. 

148. The mark of Exclamation, or Admiration, is writ- 
ten thus [I], and, as its name denotes, is used to distin- 
guish words or sentences that are exclamatory, from such 
as are not : u What do you say ! What do you say ?" The 
difference in the sense is very obvious here. Again: "He 
is going away to-night! He is going away to-night." 
The last simply states the fact ; but the first, besides 
stating the fact, expresses surprise at it. 

149. The Apostrophe, or mark of Elision, is a comma 
placed above the line, thus [']. Elision means a striking 
out ; and this niark is used for that purpose; as, don't 
for do not ; tho' for though/ lovd for loved. I have 
mentioned this mark, because it is used properly enough 
m. poetry ; but, I beg you never to use it in prose in one 
single instance during your whole life. It ought to be 



Points and Marks, 99 

called the mark not of elision, but of laziness and vul- 
garity. It is necessary as the mark of the possessive case 
of nouns, as you have seen in Letter V, paragraph 47. 
That is its use, and any other employment of it is an abuse. 

150. The Hyphen or Conjoiner is a little line used to 
connect words, or parts of words ; as in sea-fish, water-rat. 
For here are two distinct words, though they, in these in- 
stances, make but one. Sometimes the hyphen is used to 
connect many words together : " The never-to-be-forgotten 
cruelty of the borough-tyrants." When, in writing, or in 
printing, the line ends with part of a word, a hyphen is 
placed after that part, in order to show that that part is 
to be joined, in the reading, with that which begins the 
next line. 

151. These are all the grammatical marks ; but there 
are others used in writing for the purpose of saving time 
and words. The mark of quotation or of citing. This 
mark consists of tioo commas placed thus : " There were 
many men." It is used to enclose words taken from other 
writings or from other persons' discourse ; and, indeed, it 
is frequently used to enclose certain sentences, or words, 
of the writer, when he wishes to mark them as wholly 
distinct from the general course of any statement that he 
is making, or of any instruction that he is giving. I have, 
for instance, in the writing of these Letters to you, set 
off many of my examples by marks of quotation. In 
short, its use is to notify to the reader that such and such 
words, or such and such sentences, are not to be looked 
upon as forming part of the regular course of those 
thoughts which are at the present time coming from the 
mind of the writer. 

152. This mark \\[ is found in the Bible. It stands 
for paragraph. This [§] is sometimes used instead of 
the word section. As to stars [*] and the other marks 
which are used for the purpose of leading the eye of the 
reader to notes, in the same page, or at the end of the . 



100 Syntax. 

book, they are perfectly arbitrary. You may use for 
this purpose any marks that you please. But let me 
observe to you here, that notes ought seldom to be re- 
sorted to. Like parentheses, they are interrupters, and 
much more troublesome interrupters, because they gener- 
ally tell a much longer story. The employing of them 
arises, in almost all cases, from confusion in the mind of 
the writer. He finds the matter too much for him. He 
has not the talent to work it all up into one lucid whole ; 
and, therefore, he puts part of it into notes. Notes are 
seldom read. If the text, that is to say, the main part 
of a writing, be of a nature to engage our earnest atten- 
tion, we have not time to stop to read the notes : and if 
our attention be not earnestly engaged by the text, we 
soon lay down the volume, and of course read neither 
notes nor text. 

153. As a mark of abbreviation, the full point is used : 
as, " Mr. Mrs." But I know of hardly any other words 
that ought to be abbreviated ; and if these were not it 
would be all the better. People may indulge themselves 
in this practice, until at last they come to write the 
greater part of their words in single letters. The fre- 
quent use of abbreviation is always a mark of slovenliness 
and of vulgarity. I have known lords abbreviate almost 
the half of their words : it was, very likely, because they 
did not know how to spell them to the end. Instead of 
the word and, you often see people put &. For ichat 
reason I should like to know. But to this & is sometimes 
added ac; thus, &c. And is in Latin et, and c is the 
first letter of the Latin word coetera, which means the 
like, or so on. Therefore this &c. means and the like, or 
and so on. This abbreviation of a foreign word is a most 
convenient thing for such writers as have too much indo- 
lence or too little sense to say fully and clearly what they 
ought to say. If you mean to say an d the like, or and so 
on, why not say it ? This abbreviation is very frequently 



Points and Marks. 101 

made use of without the writer having any idea of its 
import. A writer on grammar says, "When these 
words are joined to if, since, dbc, they are adverbs.' 1 
But where is the like of if, or of since ? The best way 
to guard yourself against the committing of similar errors 
is never to use this abbreviation. 

154. The use of capitals and italics I will notice in 
this place. In the books printed before the middle of 
the last century, a capital letter was used as the first 
letter of every noun. Capitals are now used more spar- 
ingly. We use them at the beginning of every para- 
graph, let the word be what it may ; at the beginning of 
every sentence which follows a full-point ; at the begin- 
ning of all proper names ; at the beginning of all adjec- 
tives growing out of the names of countries, or nations ; 
as, the English language ; the French fashion ; the 
American government. We use capitals, besides, at the 
beginning of any word, when we think the doing of it 
likely to assist in elucidating our meaning, but in general 
we use them as above stated. The use of italic charac- 
ters in print is to point out, as worthy of particular atten- 
tion, the words distinguished by those characters. In 
writing with a pen, a stroke is drawn under such words 
as we wish to be considered to be in italics. If we wish 
words to be put in small capitals, we draw two strokes 
under them; if in FULL CAPITALS, we draw three 
strokes under them. 

155. The last thing I shall mention, under this head, 
is the caret [a], which is used to point upwards to a part 
which has been omitted, and which is inserted between 
the line, where the caret is placed, and the line above it. 
Things should be called by their right names, and this 
should be called the blunder -mark. I would have you, 
my dear James, scorn the use of this thing. Think 
before you write ; let it be your custom to write correctly 
and in a plain hand. Be as careful that neatness, gram- 



102 Syntax. 

mar, and sense prevail, when you write to a blacksmith 
about shoeing a horse, as when you write on the most 
important subjects, and when you expect what you write 
to be read by persons whose good opinion you are most 
anxious to obtain or secure. Habit is powerful in all cases ; 
but its power in this case is truly wonderful. "When you 
write, bear constantly in mind that some one is to read 
and to understand what you write. This will make your 
handwriting, and also your meaning, plain. Never think 
of mending what you write. Let it go. No patching ; 
no after pointing. As your pen moves, bear constantly 
in mind that it is making strokes which are to remain 
for ever. Far, I hope, from my dear James will be the 
ridiculous, the contemptible affectation, of writing in a 
slovenly or illegible hand ; or that of signing his name 
otherwise than in plain letters. 

156. In concluding this Letter, let me caution you 
against the use of what, by some, is called the dash. 
The dash is a stroke along the line ; thus, " I am rich — ■ 
I was poor — I shall be poor again." This is wild work 
indeed ! Who is to know what is intended by the use of 
these dashes t Those who have thought proper, like Mr. 
Lindley Murray, to place the dash amongst the gram- 
matical points, ought to give us some rule relative to its 
different longitudinal dimensions in different cases. The 
inch, the three-quarter-inch, the half -inch the quarter- 
inch ; these would be something determinate ; but, " the 
dash" without measure, must be a most perilous thing 
for a young grammarian to handle. In short, u the dash" 
is a cover for ignorance as to the use of points, and it 
can answer no other purpose. — A dash is very often put 
in crowded print, in order to save the room that would 
be lost by the breaks of distinct paragraphs. This is 
another matter. Here the dash comes after a full-point. 
It is the using of it in the body of a sentence against 
which I caution you. 



Points and Marks. 103 

As to the " no patching; no after-pointing," this is all very well 
for those who are endowed with uncommon talent for composi- 
tion ; but everybody cannot be a Shakespeare or a Cobbett. It is 
well known that Pope corrected and recorrected, polished and re- 
polished his lines "many a time and oft," and I have heard that 
Schiller and other good writers have done the same thing ; 
Macaulay, for instance. You will have written many a page 
before you acquire such sureness of hand and perfect power of 
expression as never to need to change a word or add a point on 
looking over what you have written. In this very paragraph I had 
first written "everybody cannot be Shakespeares or Cobbetts;" 
but, on looking it over, I saw that everybody, the subject, is singular, 
and that therefore the attribute ought to agree with it. The eye 
often detects errors committed by the ear or the tongue ; and the 
ear often detects errors committed by the hand or the pen. 

Cobbett's advice concerning the dash is, I think, by no means to 
be followed. His contempt for this mark is one of his crotchets, 
of which he had quite a large stock. The dash is now universally 
used by good writers, and is, in its proper place, conducive to 
clearness; it is, in fact, quite as good a point as any other. 
There are some persons — especially half-educated young board- 
ing-school misses — who clap in a dash for almost every pause; 
but this is no reason why it should not be used in its proper 
place, which is either immediately before some expression tend- 
ing to complete the thought, or to enclose some explanatory 
clause thrown in like a parenthesis. The first case may be illus- 
trated by the dash on page 1, immediately before the words "I 
mean dictation," and the second case by the above expression 
concerning half-educated young misses. To be sure, there are 
cases in which another point may, perhaps, be used with equal 
propriety ; but this mark is now generally recognized as a proper 
mark in punctuation, and you may use it whenever you think 
proper. 

The very best way of learning punctuation is, as I have else* 
where said, by writing to dictation. By the frequent writing 
down of other people's points, one gets a good general knowledge 
of the whole subject, and then one gradually forms a style of one's 
own. For it is well known that in the English language punctua- 
tion is to a great extent, a matter of taste; and Cobbett himself, 
as you must have seen by this time, is quite peculiar in Ms taste 
in this matter. He uses far more points than most other writers, 
especially commas, and he capitalizes far more words than most 



104 Syntax. 

others writers. This he does for the sake of emphasis, or of 
prominence ; as, for instance, in the names of the parts of speech 
throughout this whole grammar. He overdoes this matter I think, 
and he uses too many italics ; for in most sentences the proper 
emphasis must be left to the reader. 

I notice that the tendency in our modern newspapers is to drop 
as many points as possible. Whether this is done to save space, 
time, and labor, or whether it is done for the sake of improve- 
ment, I do not know ; but I do know that the punctuating of our 
New York editor of to-day presents a remarkable contrast to that 
of Cobbett; for you may see any day in the leading columns of 
the Herald, the Tribune^ or the Times, sentences of seven or 
eight lines, with all manner of phrases and clauses, without a 
single point of any description, except a period at the end. I 
suppose they will leave that out too, by-and-by. I once heard of 
a painter who put a period between every word of the sign which 
he was painting, but put no point at the end. On being reproached 
with this, he exclaimed: " Why, every fool knows enough to stop 
when he comes to the end!" I suppose our New York editor 
would excuse his omission of points on the same principle, that 
every one should know enough to stop where he ought to stop. 
Cobbett committed, I think, the opposite error : he seems to have 
attempted to put a point after every word, or nearly every word, 
where a pause occurs ; which is something that ought not to be 
done, and indeed never is nor can be done. Those pauses occurring 
where there are no points are rhetorical pauses, which the feeling 
or instinct of every good reader leads him to make. We often 
pause, for instance, for the sake of emphasis; as after points, 
feeling and instinct in the preceding sentence. 

The matter of simple, compound, and complex sentences, which 
Cobbett merely touches, is very important to those who intend to 
pass an examination in grammar ; for a knowledge of it is neces- 
sary in Analysis, and all those who pretend to have a ''teaching " 
knowledge of grammar must know how to analyze. I will there- 
fore try to give a little fuller explanation of it. "I study." This 
is a simple sentence, because it consists of but one simple proposi- 
tion or assertion, having but one subject and one predicate. "I 
study and Charles plays. " Here there are two distinct propositions, 
or two distinct clauses ; hence the sentence is compound. (Mark 
that word distinct.) "When I study, Charles plays." Here there 
are also two clauses, but not distinct: they are dependent, or 
rather one depends on the other: hence the sentence is called 



Points and Ofarks. 105 

complex. The clause that makes complete sense (Charles plays), 
is the chief clause, and the other is the dependent one. You per- 
ceive that the dependent clause simply shows when Charles plays ; 
therefore the main thing is the playing of Charles, and the other 
simply shows the time of his playing. When there is but one 
proposition or statement, the sentence is simple; when there are 
two or more distinct or separate propositions, the sentence is com- 
pound ; but when there are two or more propositions, one depend- 
ing on the other, the sentence is complex. " Every morning at 
five o'clock we walk into the forest beyond the river. " Here is 
but one simple statement, toe walk, and the rest consists of modi- 
fying phrases. We walk. When? Every morning. At what 
part of the morning? At five o'clock. Where? Into the forest. 
Where is the forest ? Beyond the river. 

Here is a good, though somewhat mechanical rule, for deter- 
mining the nature of a sentence : Any sentence that you may cut 
into two sentences by placing a period after any word in it, is 
compound; any sentence, consisting of two or more clauses, 
which you can not thus cut into two sentences, is complex. A 
sentence consisting of but one proposition, having but one subject 
or predicate, is simple. Of Cobbett's three sentences, at the begin- 
ning of this paragraph 156, the first is complex, the second com- 
pound, the third simple. 

And now I see that I have to explain something else that is 
necessary to a knowledge of Analysis. — I mean the classification 
of sentences into declarative, interrogative, exclamatory and im- 
perative. "I study" is called a simple declarative sentence; 
declarative, because it declares or affirms something. Xine out of 
ten of all the sentences we utter are declarative. " Do I study?" 
is a simple interrogative sentence; interrogative, because it asks a 
question. An interrogation may sometimes be merely a forcible 
way of declaring something ; as. Should any man be deprived of 
his liberty because he is black? But this is a figure, as you will 
see by-and-by. "How I love to study!" is a simple exclamatory 
sentence; exclamatory, because it contains an exclamation. 
"Study, and get on in the world!" is a compound imperative sen- 
tence; imperative, because it contains a command or an entreaty. 
Thus, we find that a sentence that declares or affirms anything is 
declarative; that one that asks a question is interrogative : that 
one that contains an exclamation is exclamatory; and that one 
that contains a command or an entreaty is imperative. Let me 
give you three more examples, covering the whole ground: 



106 Syntax, 

John Brown was hanged. (Simple declarative sentence.) 
Was John Brown hanged? (Simple interrogative sentence.) 
What a spectacle for men and angels ! John Brown hanged and 

Jefferson Davis pardoned ! (Compound exclamatory sentence. ) 
Hang John Brown, and pardon Jefferson Davis. (Compound 

imperative sentence.) 



LETTEE XV. 

syntax, as relating to articles. 

My dear James : 

157. Before you proceed to my instructions relative to 
the employing of Articles, you will do well to read again 
all the paragraphs in Letter IV. Our Articles are so 
few in number, and they are subject to so little variation 
in their orthography, that very few errors can arise in the 
use of them. But, still, errors may arise ; and it will 
be necessary to guard you against them. 

158. You will not fall into very gross errors in the use 
of the Articles. You will not say, as in the erroneous 
passage cited by Doctor Lowth, " And I persecuted 
this way unto the death," meaning death generally ; but 
you may commit errors less glaring. " The Chancellor 
informed the Queen of it, and she immediately sent for 
the Secretary and Treasurer." Now, it is not certain 
here, whether the Secretary and Treasurer be not one 
and the same person ; which uncertainty would have been 
avoided by a repetition of the Article : " the Secretary 
and the Treasurer :'■' and you will bear in mind that, in 
every sentence, the very first thing to be attended to is 
clearness as to meaning. 

159. Nouns which express the whole of a species do 
not, in general, take the definite Article ; as, " Grass is 
good for horses, and wheat for men." Yet, in speaking of 



As delating to Articles. 107 

the appearance of the face of the country, we say, " The 
grass looks well ; the wheat is blighted." The reason of 
this is that we are, in this last case, limiting our meaning 
to the grass and the wheat which are on the ground at this 
time. "How do h ops sell? Hops are dear ; but the hops 
look promising." In this respect there is a passage in 
Mr. Tull which is faulty. "Neither could weeds be of any 
prejudice to corn." It should be "the corn;" for he does 
not mean corn universally, but the standing corn, and the 
corn amongst which weeds grow; and, therefore, the 
definite Article is required. 

160. "Ten shillings the bushel," and like phrases, are 
perfectly correct. They mean, "ten shillings by the 
bushel, or for the bushel." Instead of this mode of ex- 
pression we sometimes use, "ten shillings a bushel:" 
that is to say, ten shillings for a bushel, or a bushel at a 
time. Either of these modes of expression is far prefer- 
able to per bushel ; for the per is not English, and is, to 
the greater part of the people, a mystical sort of word. 

161. The indefinite Article a, or an, is used with the 
words day, month, year, and others; as, once a day; 
twice a month ; a thousand poimds a year. It means in 
a day, in a month, in or for a year; and though per 
annum means the same as this last, the English phrase is, 
in all respects, the best. The same may be said of per 
cent., that is/><?r centum, or, in plain English, for the hun- 
dred, or a hundred: by ten per centum we mean ten for 
the hundred, or ten for a hundred / and why can we 
not, then, say, in plain English, what we mean? 

162. ^Yhen there are several nouns following the indef- 
inite Article, care ought to be taken that it accord with 
them. "A dog, cat, owl, and sparrow." Otol requires an ; 
and, therefore, the Article must be repeated in this 
phrase ; as, a dog, a cat, an owl, and a sparrow. 

163. Nouns, signifying fixed and settled collections of 
individuals, as thousand, hundred, dozen, score, take the 



108 Syntax, 

indefinite Article, though they are of plural meaning. It 
is a certain mass, or number, or multitude, called a score ; 
and so on ; and the Article agrees with these understood 
words, which are in the singular number. 

Ih a recent announcement of a new novel by Robert Buchanan, 
the publishers quote this one line concerning it from the London 
Spectator: "The work of a genius and a poet," — which is in it- 
self a sufficient comment on the discriminating taste of the pub- 
lisher and the culture of the critic. But I suppose a man may be 
a good publisher or a good critic, and yet not know how to write 
or to select good English. 

You must say either "the first and the second class," or "the 
first and second classes ;" not "the first and second class," which 
would mean one class that is both first and second. Take one or two 
similar examples: "I have read the first and the second chapter, 
or the first and second chapters ; strike out the first and the second 
line, or the first and second lines." You may say, "the north and 
south line," because this is one line that runs north and south ; but 
you cannot say " the north and west line." It will not do to say 
"the two first classes," because there cannot be any such thing as 
two first classes; but " the first two classes," which means simply 
the two classes that come first in order. So with other similar ex- 
pressions ; as, the first two pages, the first two days, &c. You 
must say, "He is a better speaker than writer," not "than a 
writer." "He is a statesman and historian," not "a statesman 
and an historian." " Wanted — A clerk and copyist." How often 
such an expression is used to mean two persons, whereas it really 
means one ! " There lives in this town a philosopher and a poet." 
The predicate shows that one person is meant, while the subject 
indicates two. Mr. White quotes the following announcement 
from a street-car : ' ' Passengers are requested not to hold conversa- 
tion with either conductor or driver;" and then says: "Now this 
implies that there are two conductors and two drivers, and that 
the passengers are asked not to talk, or, in elegant phrase, ' hold 
conversation,' with either of them. The simple introduction of the 
rectifies the phrase : ' not to hold conversation with either the con- 
ductor or the driver.' " 

I saw the other day in Pearl Street, New York, a place with 
this sign: "Hatters, Tailors, and Factory Stoves." This really 
means that the owner of the place has hatters and tailors to sell, as 
well as factory stoves. It might pass with the sign of the pos- 



As Relating to Nouns. 109 

sessive : "Hatters', Tailors', and Factory Stoves;" but this, too, 
is bad, because hatters and tailors cannot be placed in the same 
category with a factory. It should be ' ' Stoves for Hatters, Tailors, 
and Manufacturers," or "Hatters', Tailors', and Manufacturers' 
Stoves. " But this would probably be too long for the stove-maker ; 
so he preferred writing nonsense. This trying to make everything 
short is the root of these errors. Here is a man in Beekman Street 
who calls his Eating-House a " Commercial Lunch! " What kind 
of a compound may a commercial lunch be? Is it not a lunch 
made of various articles of commerce : beeswax, potatoes, turpen- 
tine, pig-iron, and leather? Of course he means a Lunch for 
Commercial People, or Lunch for Business Men, or still better, 
Business Men's Lunch; but this, no doubt, was too long for him. 



LETTEK XVI. 

syntax, as relating to nouns. 

My dear James 

164. Read again Letter V, f the subject of which is the 
Etymology of Nouns. Nouns are governed, as it is called, 
by verbs and prepositions; that is to say, these latter 
sorts of words cause nouns to be in such or such a case / 
and there must be a concord, or an agreement, between 
the Nouns and the other words, which, along with the 
Nouns, compose a sentence. 

165. But these matters will be best explained when I 
come to the Syntax of Verbs, for, until we take the verb 
into account, we cannot go far in giving rules for the 
forming of sentences. Under the present head, therefore, 
I shall content myself with doing little more than to give 
some farther account of the manner of using the posses- 
sive case of Nouns ; that being the only case to denote 
which our Nouns vary their endings. 

166. The possessive case was pretty fully spoken of by 
me in the Letter just referred to ; but there are certain 



110 Syntax, 

other observations to make with regard to the using of it 
in sentences. When the Noun which is in the possessive 
case is expressed by a circumlocution, that is to say by 
many words in lieu of one, the sign of the possessive case 
is joined to the last word; as, "John, the old farmer's, 
wife." "Oliver, the spy's, evidence." It is however much 
better to say, "The wife of John, the old farmer." The 
"evidence of Oliver, the spy." 

167. "When two or more Nouns in the possessive case 
follow each other, and are joined by a conjunctive con- 
junction, the sign of the possessive case is, when the 
thing possessed is the same, put to the last noun only ; 
as, "Peter, Joseph, and Richard's estate." In this ex- 
ample, the thing possessed being one and the same thing, 
the sign applies equally to each of the three possessive 
Nouns. But "Peter's, Joseph's, and Richard's estate," 
implies that each has an estate ; or, at least, it will admit 
of that meaning being given to it, while the former phrase 
will not. 

168. Sometimes the sign of the possessive case is left 
out, and a hyphen is used in its stead; as, "Edwards, the 
government- spy r ." That is to say, "the government's 
spy ;" or, " the spy of the government." These two words, 
joined in this manner, are called a compound Noun ; and 
to this compounding of Nouns out* language is very 
prone. We say " chamber- floor, horse-shoe, dog-collar /" 
that is to say, "chamber's floor, horse's shoe, do fs collar." 

■ 169. This is an advantage peculiar to out' language. It 
enables us to say much in few words, which always gives 
strength to language ; and, after clearness, strength is the 
most valuable quality that writing or speaking can possess. 
"The Yorkshireinen flew to arms." If we could not com- 
pound our words, we would have to say, " The men of the 
shire of York flew to arms." When you come to learn 
French, you will soon see how much the English lan- 
guage is better than the French in this respect. 



As Relating to Nouns. Ill 

170. You must take care, when you use the possessive 
case, not to use after it words which create a confusion in 
meaning. Hume has this sentence: " They flew to arms 
and attacked Northumberland's house, vnhom they put to 
death." We know what is meant, because whom can 
relate to persons only; but if it had been an attack on 
Northumberland's men, the meaning would have been 
that the men vjere put to death. However, the sentence, 
as it stands, is sufficiently incorrect. It should have been : 
" They flew to arms, and attacked the house of Northum- 
berland, whom they put to death." 

171. A passage from Doctor Hugh Blair, the author of 
Lectures on Rhetoric, will give you another instance of 
error in the use of the possessive case. I take it from 
the 24th Lecture: "In comparing Demosthenes and 
Cicero, most of the French critics are disposed to give 
the preference to the latter. P. Rapin, the Jesuit, in the 
parallels which he has drawn between some of the most 
eminent Greek and Roman writers, uniformly decides in 
favor of the Roman. For the preference which he gives 
to Cicero, he assigns and lays stress on one reason, of a 
pretty extraordinary nature, viz., that Demosthenes could 
not possibly have so clear an insight as Cicero into the 
manners and passions of men. Why ! because he had not 
the advantage of perusing Aristotle s I'reatise on Rheto- 
ric, wherein, says our critic, he has fully laid open that 
mystery ; and to support this weighty argument, he en- 
ters into a controversy with A. Gellius, in order to prove 
that Aristotle's Rhetoric was not published till after De- 
mosthenes had spoken, at least, his most considerable 
orations." It is surprising that the Doctor should have 
put such a passage as this upon paper, and more surpris- 
ing that he should leave it in this state after having 
perused it with that care which is usually employed in 
examining writings that are to be put into print, and 
especially writings in which every word is expected to be 



112 Syntax, 

used in a proper manner. In Bacon, in Tull, in Black- 
stone, in Hume, in Swift, in Bolingbroke : in all writers, 
however able, we find errors. Yet, though many of their 
sentences will not stand the test of strict grammatical 
criticism, the sense generally is clear to our minds; and 
we read on. But. in this passage of Dr. Blair, all is 
confusion : the mind is puzzled: we at last hardly know 
whom or what the writer is talking about, and we fairly 
come to a stand. 

172. In speaking of the many faults in this passage, I 
shall be obliged to make here observations which would 
come under the head of pronouns, verbs, adverbs, and 
prepositions. The first two of the three sentences are in 
themselves rather obscure, and are well enough calculated 
for ushering in the complete confusion that follows. The 
he. which comes immediately after the word because, may 
relate to Demosthenes ; but to what Noun does the second 
he relate? It would, when we first look at it, seem to 
relate to the same Noun as the first he relates to; for the 
Doctor cannot call Aristotle s Treatise on Rhetoric a he. 
No: in speaking of this the Doctor says -wherein /' that 
is to say, in which. He means, I dare say. that the he 
should stand for Aristotle ; but it does not stand for 
Aristotle. This Noun is not a nam i native in the sentence ; 
and it cannot have the pronoun relating to it as such. 
This he may relate to Cicero, who may be supposed to 
have laid open a mystery in the perusing of the treatise ; 
and the words which follow the he would seem to give 
countenance to this supposition; for what mystery is 
meant by the words -that mystery?" Is it the mystery 
of rhetoric, or the mystery of the manners and passions 
of men f This is not all, however: for the Doctor, as if 
bewitched by the love of confusion, must tack on another 
long member to the sentence, and bring forward another 
he to stand for P. Rapin, whom and whose argument we 
have, amidst the general confusion, whollv forgotten. 



As Relating to Nouns. 113 

There is an error also in the use of the active participle 
perusing. " Demosthenes could not have so complete an 
insight as Cicero, because he had not the advantage of 
perusing. That is to say, the advantage of being en- 
gaged in perusing. But this is not what is meant. The 
Doctor means that he had not had the advantage of 
perusing; or, rather, that he had not the advantage of 
having perused. In other words, that Demosthenes could 
not have, or possess, a certain kind of knowledge at the 
time when he made his orations, because at that time, he 
had not, or did not possess, the advantage of having 
perused, or having finished to peruse, the treatise of Aris- 
totle. Towards the close of the last sentence the adverb 
" at least " is put in a wrong place. The Doctor means, 
doubtless, that the adverb should apply to considerable, 
and not to spoken; but, from its being improperly placed, 
it applies to the latter, and not to the former. He means 
to say that Demosthenes had spoken the most consider- 
able, at least, of his orations ; but as the words now stand, 
they mean that he had done the speaking part to them, if 
he had done nothing more. There is an error in the use 
of the word "insight," followed, as it is, by "into" We 
may have a look, or sight, into a house, but not an insight. 
This would be to take an inside view of an inside. 

173. We have here a pretty good proof that a knowl- 
edge of the Greek and Latin is not sufficient to prevent 
men from writing bad English. Here is a profound 
scholar, a teacher of Rhetoric, discussing the comparative 
merits of Greek and Latin writers, and disputing with a 
French critic; here he is writing English in a manner 
more incorrectly than you will, I hope, be liable to write 
it at the end of your reading of this little book. Lest it 
should be supposed that I have taken great pains to hunt 
out this erroneous passage of Doctor Blair, I will inform 
you that I have hardly looked into his book. Your 
brothers, in reading it through, marked a great number 



114 Syntax, 

of erroneous passages, from amongst which I have selected 
the passage just cited. "With what propriety, then, are 
the Greek and Latin languages called the " learned lan- 
guages?" 

We take the form 's from the Germans, and hence it is called 
the Saxon possessive ; we take the form of the from the French, 
and hence it is called the Norman possessive. You will notice 
that the Saxon possessive is used, generally, in speaking of living 
things, and the other in speaking of things icithout life: "the 
man's hat, the horse's tail, the cow's horns ; the top of the house, 
the lid of the kettle, the color of the apple;" but this is by no 
means always the case, for we can speak of the mountains ft?/>and 
of the roar of the lion. Sometimes we are obliged to use the Nor- 
man possessive to avoid a misconstruction, as in the case of "the 
house of Northumberland," above quoted. 

There is another peculiar use of the possessive case, which Cob- 
bett has not mentioned. * ' He spoke of John's (his) going to col- 
lege. There is no doubt of the biWs passing the House." We often 
see the objective used in such cases, instead of the possessive; 
but the latter is correct. Just as we say "a friend of mine, of 
thine, of his, of hers, of yours, of theirs," so we say "a soldier of 
the king's, a horse of my neighbor's, a book of George's." So 
Cobbett ought to have said above, "this erroneous passage of 
Doctor Blair's." 

You notice that the only case-change an English noun can un- 
dergo is the addition of 's in the possessive. In both English and 
French the nominative and objective cases of nouns are invariable. 
Not so in German. The following sentence will show you at a 
glance the difference between our language and the German in this 
respect : 

no». obj. nom. obj. 

The boy loves the traveler. The traveler loves the boy. 
Der Knabe liebt den Beuenden. Der Reisende liebt den Knaben. 

Here is a curious passage on this subject from Mr. White's 
"Everyday English" — a passage which, to prevent a confusion of 
apostrophes, I give in one paragraph, with none but Mr. White's 
points, except the dash at the beginning and at the end : 

— The Board of Civil Service Examiners at Washington gave, as 
a* test of the knowledge of the use of the apostrophe as a sign of 
the possessive case, the following sentence: "The Commissioner 
of Custom's decisions are correct," requiring the apostrophe to be 



As Relating to Pronouns. 115 

placed after " Customs." A dispute having arisen upon the point, 
and it being contended that the proper form was "The Commis- 
sioner's (of Customs) decisions are correct," an officer of the 
Treasury Department submitted the question to me for an 
opinion. — • 

And Mr. White declares that the decision of the Civil Service 
Board is correct. Now I am positive that, in this case, both Mr. 
White and the Board of Examiners are wrong. It is when a word 
or title is in the possessive case pltjkal that we put merely an 
apostrophe after the s; as, the Examiners' duties; the Commission- 
ers' affairs; but the term " Commissioner of Customs" is not plural, 
any more than "Secretary of the Treasury" is plural. We say 
" The Secretary of the Treasury's report;" and if the Saxon posses- 
sive is to be used, grammar demands that we say ' ' The Commis- 
sioner of Customs's decisions;" for the sign of the possessive is for 
the whole expression, and not simply for customs. An apostrophe 
alone may be placed after Customs, because it will sound better, but 
not because it is grammatical. 

But why use this form at all ? Has it not been from a desire to 
avoid just such awkward expressions that the Norman possessive 
has come into use ? Does it not sound much better to say ' ' The 
decisions of the Commissioner of Customs" than "The Commis- 
sioner of Customs's decisions?" — By the bye, is it not somewhat 
remarkable, not to say absurd, that the Board of Examiners should 
give applicants for inferior offices questions such as they them- 
selves are in dispute about, and concerning which even critics in 
language are at variance ? 



LETTER XVII. 

syntax, as relating to pronouns. 

My dear James : 

174. You will now read again Letter VI. It will bring 
you back to the subject of pronouns. Vou will bear in 
mind that personal Pronouns stand for, or in the place 
of, nouns ; and that the greatest care ought always to be 
taken in using them, because, being small words, and in 



116 Syntax, 

frequent use, the proper weight of them is very often 
unattended to. 

175. Tou have seen in the passage from Doctor Blair, 
quoted in the foregoing Letter, what confusion arises 
from the want of taking care that the Pronoun relate 
clearly to its nominative case, and that it be not left to 
be understood to relate to anything else. Little words, 
of great and sweeping influence, ought to be used with 
the greatest care; because errors in the using of them 
make such great errors in point of meaning. In order to 
impress, at the outset, these precepts on your mind, I 
will give you an instance of this kind of error from 
Addison ; and, what is well calculated to heighten the in- 
terest you ought to feel upon the occasion, is, that the sen- 
tence which contains the error is, by Doctor Blair, held 
forth to students of languages, in the University of Edin- 
burgh, as a perfect model of correctness and of elegance. 
The sentence is from Addison's Spectator, Number 411. 
"There are, indeed, but very few who know how to be 
idle and innocent, or have a relish of any pleasures that 
are not criminal; every diversion they take is at the ex- 
pense of some one virtue or other, and their very first 
step out of business is into vice or folly." Dr. Blair says: 
"Nothing can be more elegant, or more finely turned, 
than this sentence. It is neat, clear, and musical. "We 
could hardly alter one word, or displace one member, 
without spoiling it. Few sentences are to be found more 
finished, or more happy." See Blair's 20th Lecture on 
Bhetoric. 

176. Now, then, my dear little James, let us see whether 
we plain English scholars have not a little more judgment 
than this professor in a learned University, who could 
not, you will observe, be a Doctor, until he had preached 
a sermon in the Latin language. "What does the pronoun 
they mean in this sentence of Mr. Addison? What noun 
does it relate to; or stand for? WTiat noun is the nomi- 



As Relating to Pronouns. 117 

native of the sentence'? The nominative of the sentence 
is the word feio, meaning few persons. Very well, then, 
the Pronoun they relates to this nominative; and the 
meaning of the sentence is this : " That but few persons 
know how to be idle and innocent ; that few persons have 
a relish of any pleasures that are not criminal ; that every 
diversion these few persons take is at the expense of some 
one virtue or other, and that the very first step of these 
few persons out of business is into vice or folly." So 
that the sentence says precisely the contrary of what the 
author meant ; or, rather, the whole is perfect nonsense. 
All this arises from the misuse of the Pronoun they. If, 
instead of this word, the author had put people in gen- 
eral^ or most people, or most men, or any word or words 
of the same meaning, all would have been right. 

177. I will take another instance of the consequence of 
being careless in the use of personal Pronouns. It is 
from Judge Blackstone, Book II, Chapter 6. "For the 
custom of the manor has, in both cases, so far superseded 
the will of the lord, that, provided the services be per- 
formed, or stipulated for by fealty, he cannot, in the first 
instance, refuse to admit the heir of his tenant upon his 
death; nor, in the second, can he remove his present 
tenant so long as he lives." Here are lord, heir, and 
tenant, all confounded. We may guess at the Judge's 
meaning ; but we cannot say that we know what it is ; we 
cannot say that we are certain whose life, or vihose death, 
he is speaking of. 

178. Never write a personal Pronoun, without duly 
considering what noun it will, upon a reading of the 
sentence, be found to relate to. There must be a noun, 
expressed or understood, to which the Pronoun clearly 
relates, or you will not write sense. " The land-holder 
has been represented as a monster which must be hunted 
down, and the fund-holder as a still greater evil, and 
both have been described as rapacious creatures, who 



118 Syntax. 

take from the people fifteen pence out of every quartern 
loaf. They have been told that Parliamentary Reform is 
no more than a half measure, changing only one set of 
thieves for another ; and that they must go to the land, as 
nothing short of that would avail them." This is taken 
from the memorable report of a committee of the House 
of Lords, in 1817, on which report the cruel dungeon bill 
was passed. Now, to what nouns do these Pronouns 
relate 1 Who are the nominatives in the first sentence 1 
The land-holder and the fund-holder, to be sure ; and, 
therefore, to them do the Pronouns relate. These lords 
mean, doubtless, that the people had been told that the 
people must go to the land ; that nothing else would avail 
the people ; but, though they mean this, they do not say 
it ; and this part of their report is as false in grammar as 
other parts of the report were in fact. 

179. When there are two or more nouns connected by 
a copulative conjunction, and when a Personal Pronoun is 
made use of to relate to them, or stand for them, you must 
take care that the personal Pronoun agree with them in 
number. "He was fonder of nothing than of wit and 
raillery ; but he is far from being happy in it." This 
Doctor Blair, in his 19th Lecture, says of Lord Shaftes- 
bury. Either wit and raillery are one and the same thing, 
or they are different things; if the former, one of the 
words is used unnecessarily; if the latter, the Pronoun 
ought to have been them and not it. 

" I learned from Macaulay never to be afraid 

of using the same word or name over and over again, if by that 
means anything could be added to clearness or force. Macaulay 
never goes on, like some writers, talking about 'the former' and 
; the latter,' 'he, she, it, they,' through clause after clause, while 
his reader has to look back to see which of several persons it is 
that is so darkly referred to. No doubt a pronoun, like any other 
word, may often be repeated with advantage, if it is perfectly 
clear who is meant by the pronoun. And with Macaulay' s pro- 
nouns, it is always perfectly clear who is meant by them." — E. A. 



As Relating to JPronouns. 119 

Freeman, in the International Review. Quoted by A. S. Hill. 
I have frequently noticed that there is a misty uncertainty as to the 
meaning of sentences in which "the former" and "the latter" 
occur. How often one is obliged to stop for a moment, and con- 
sider which is "the former" and which "the latter"! I do not 
say you must not use these words; Cobbett, you see, uses them 
quite clearly in this last paragraph; but it is, generally, better to 
repeat the words for which they stand. 

180. When, however, the nouns take the disjunctive 
conjunction or, the Pronoun must be in the singular ; as, 
" "When he shoots a partridge, a pheasant, or a woodcock, 
he gives it away." 

181* Nouns of number, or multitude, such as Mob, JPar- 
liament, Rabble, House of Commons, Regiment, Court of 
King^s Bench, Den of Thieves, and the like, may have 
Pronouns agreeing with them either in the singular or in 
the plural number ; for we may, for instance, say of the 
House of Commons, " They refused to hear evidence 
against Castlereagh when Mr. Maddox accused him of 
having sold a seat;" or, "It refused to hear evidence." 
But we must be uniform in our use of the Pronoun in 
this respect. We must not, in the same sentence, and 
applicable to the same noun, use the singular in one part 
of the sentence and the plural in another part. We must 
not, in speaking of the House of Commons, for instance, 
say, " They one year voted unanimously that cheap corn 
was an evil, and the next year it voted unanimously that 
dear corn was an evil." There are persons who pretend 
to make very nice distinctions as to the cases when these 
nouns of multitude ought to take the singular, and when 
they ought to take the plural, Pronoun ; but these dis- 
tinctions are too nice to be of any real use. The rule is 
this : that nouns of multitude may take either the singu- 
lar, or the plural, Pronoun; but not both in the same 
sentence. 

This will never do ; it is far too indefinite. The pronoun stand- 
ing for a noun of multitude is used in the singular if the idea of 



120 Syntax, 

unity is to be conveyed, and in the plural if the idea of plurality is 
to be conveyed. Let me illustrate with some of these very nouns 
which Cobbett so sarcastically huddles together: "The mob now 
began to scatter in every direction, and they set up a hideous yell 
as they moved off. The mob came on in one compact body, and 
it did not fail to press itself through the gates of the palace. He 
hated the rabble, because they hated him. The rabble of New 
York has a language and a literature of its own. The House of 
Commons could not agree on any measure of Kef orm ; so they 
were dismissed by the king. The House of Commons was unani- 
mous in condemning the obstructing Irish members, and it sus- 
pended them for two weeks. When the Court of King's Bench 
passed sentence on Mr. Cobbett, it refused to reconsider its 
decision. I have been informed that there was some difference 
of opinion in the Court of King's Bench concerning Mr. Cobbett' s 
case, though they refused to reconsider their decision. Here is a 
den of thieves ; suppress it. We came upon a den of thieves, who 
were so numerous that we did not venture to attack themy Thus, 
you see, that the singularity or plurality of the pronoun standing 
for a noun of multitude depends entirely upon whether an idea of 
unity or of plurality is to be conveyed. 

182. As to gender, it is hardly possible to make a mis- 
take. There are no terminations to denote gender, except 
in the third person singular, he, she, or it. We do, how- 
ever, of ten per sonify things. Speaking of a nation, we often 
say she ; of the sun, we say he / of the moon, we say she. 
We may personify things at our pleasure ; but we must 
take care to be consistent, and not call a thing he, or she, 
in one part of a sentence, and it in another part. The 
occasions when you ought to personify things, and when 
you ought not, cannot be stated in any precise ride. 
Your own taste and judgment will be your best guides. 
I shall give you my opinion about figures of speech in a 
future Letter. 

In an article on Longfellow, in the North American Review for 
July, 1882, the writer speaks of meeting "Mrs. William Cullen 
Bryant and her daughter, and others of my countrymen;" but you 
can hardly make such a blunder as that. 

183. Nouns which denote sorts, or kinds, of living crea- 



As Relating to Pronouns. 121 

tures, and which do not of themselves distinguish the 
male from the female, such as rabbit, hare, hog, cat, pheas- 
ant, fo%d, take the neuter Pronoun, unless we happen to 
know the gender of the individual we are speaking about. 
If I see you with a cock pheasant in your hand, I say, 
" Where did you shoot him?" but if you tell me you 
have a pheasant, I say, "Where did you shoot itf n (See 
paragraphs 42 and 43. ) 

184. The personal Pronouns in their possessive case 
must, of course, agree in number and gender with 
their correspondent nouns or Pronouns: "John and 
Thomas have been so foolish as to sell their land and to 
purchase what is called stock ; but their sister, who has 
too much sense to depend on a bubble for her daily bread, 
has kept her land; theirs is gone forever; but hers is 
safe." So they must, also, in their objective case: "John 
and Thomas will lose the interest of their money, which 
will soon cease to be paid to them. The rents of their 
sister will be regularly paid to her ; and Richard will also 
enjoy his income, which is to be paid to him by his sister." 
If there be nouns of both genders used before Pronouns, 
care must be taken that no confusion or obscurity arise 
from the misuse of the Pronoun. Hume says: "They 
declared it treason to attempt, imagine, or speak evil of 
the king, queen, or his heirs." This has, at least, a mean- 
ing, which shuts out the heirs of the queen. In such a 
case the feminine as well as the masculine pronoun should 
be used: "his or her heirs." 

185. Take care, in using the personal Pronouns, not to 
employ the objective case where you ought to employ the 
nominative; and take care also of the opposite error. 
"Him strikes I: Her loves he." These offend the ear at 
once. But when a number of words come in between 
the discordant parts, the ear does not detect the error. 
"It was some of those who came hither last night, and 
went away this morning, who did the mischief, and not 

6 



122 Syntax, 

my brother and me." It ought to be "my brother and I." 
For I am not, in this instance, the object but the actor, or 
supposed actor. "Who broke that glass?" "It was me" 
It ought to be I ; that is to say, "It was I who broke it." 
Fill up the sentence with all the words that are under- 
stood ; and if there be errors, you will soon discover them. 
After the words than and as, this error, of putting the 
objective for the nominative, is frequently committed; as, 
"John was very rich, but Peter was richer than him; 
and, at the same time, as learned as him, or any of his 
family." It ought to be richer than he; as learned as he; 
for the full meaning here is, "richer than he was; as 
learned as he was." But it does not always happen that 
the nominative case comes after than or as. "I love you 
more than him ; I give you more than him ; I love you 
as well as him ; " that is to say, I love you more than I 
love him ; I give you more than I give to him ; I love 
you as well as Hove him. Take away him and put he, in 
all these cases, and the grammar is just as good, only the 
meaning is quite different. "I love you as well as him," 
means that I love you as well as I love him; but "I 
love you as well as he," means, that I love you as well as 
he loves you. 

186. You see, then, of what importance this distinction 
of cases is. But you must not look for this word, or that 
word, coming before or coming after to be your guide. 
It is reason which is to be your sole guide. "When the 
person or thing represented by the Pronoun is the object, 
then it must be in the objective case ; when it is the actor, 
or when it is merely the person or thing said to be this or 
that, then it must be in the nominative case. Read again 
paragraphs 46, 47, and 48, of Letter V. 

187. The errors committed with regard to the con- 
founding of cases arise most frequently when the Pro- 
nouns are placed, in the sentences, at a great distance 
from the words which are connected with them, and which 



As Relating to Pronouns. 123 

determine the case. "He and his sister, and not their 
uncle and cousins, the estate was given to/' . Here is 
nothing that sounds harsh ; but, bring the Pronoun close 
to the preposition that demands the objective case; say 
the estate was given to he ; and then you perceive the 
grossness of the error in a moment. "The work of 
national ruin was pretty effectually carried on by the 
ministers; but more effectually by the paper-money 
makers than they." This does not hurt the ear; but it 
ought to be them ; u more effectually than by them." 

188. The Pronouns mine, thine, theirs, yours, hers, his, 
stand frequently by themselves ; that is to say, not fol- 
lowed by any noun. But then the noun is understood. 
"That is hers" That is to say, her property ; her hat, or 
whatever else. No difficulty can arise in the use of these 
words. 

Except one. Some people erroneously write these words with 
an apostrophe ; our's, etc. A gentleman once showed me a letter 
which he considered perfect. So it was ; all except the last two 
words, which were written thus: "Your's tmely." 

189. But the use of the personal Pronoun it is a subject 
of considerable importance. Read again paragraphs 60 
and 61, Letter VI. Think well upon what you find there ; 
and when you have done that, proceed with me. This 
Pronoun with the verb to be is in constant use in our 
language. To say, " Your uncle came hither last night," 
is not the same thing as to say, "It was your uncle icho 
came hither last night," though the fact related be the 
same. "It is J" who write" is very different from "I 
write," though in both cases, my writing is the fact very 
clearly expressed, and is one a I the same fact. "It is 
those men who deserve well oi deir country," means a 
great deal more than "Those men deserve well of their 
country." The principal verbs are the same ; the prepo- 
sitions are the same; but the real meaning is different. 
"It is the dews and showers that make the grass grow," 



124 Syntax, 

is very different from merely observing, "Dews and 
showers make the grass grow." 

190. Doctor Lowth has given it as his opinion, that it 
is not correct to place plural nouns or pronouns after the 
it, thus used ; an opinion which arose from the want of a 
little more reflection. The it has nothing to do, gram- 
matically speaking, with the rest of the sentence. The it, 
together with the verb to be, express states of being, in 
some instances, and in others this phrase serves to mark, 
in a strong manner, the subject, in a mass, of what is about 
to be affirmed or denied. Of course, this phrase, which 
is in almost incessant use, may be followed by nouns and 
pronouns in the singular, or in the plural number. I 
forbear to multiply examples, or to enumerate the various 
ways in which this phrase is used, because one grain of 
reasoning is worth whole tons of memory. The principle 
being once in your mind, it will be ready to be applied 
to every class of cases, and every particular case of each 



An example, however, often sticks where the principle fails to 
do so. " It is I; it is thou; it is he; it is she; it is we; it is you; 
it is they; it is the devil; it is the devils." These are all correct; 
because it is the subject, is is the predicate, and what follows is 
the attribute, which may be singular or plural. — I cannot help 
remarking that the pause after "thus used" in the third line of 
the above paragraph is a capital example of the place where the 
dash ought to be used. 

191. For want of reliance on principles, instead of ex- 
amples, how the latter have swelled in number, and 
grammar-books in bulk ! But it is much easier to quote 
examples tha-n to lay down principles. For want of a 
little thought as to the matter immediately before us, 
some grammarians have found out "an absolute case" as 
they call it; and Me. Lindley Murray gives an instance 
of it in these words : " Shame being lost, all virtue is lost." 
The full meaning of the sentence is this : It being, or the 



As Relating to Pronouns. 125 

state of things being such, that " shame is lost, all virtue 
is lost." 

This " shame being lost " is called by some grammarians a parti- 
cipial phrase ; by others, an abridged participial clause, standing 
for "As shame is lost." Therefore, "all virtue is lost, as shame 
is lost;" the second clause modifying the first. "On arriving in 
London, I went to see Madame Tussaud's Exhibition." These first 
four words form another such participial phrase or abridged parti- 
cipial clause, modifying went: "I went, on arriving in London 
(when I arrived in London), to see Madame Tussaud's Exhibi- 
tion." — This absolute case is something like what other grammarians 
call the independent case: "Charles, mind what you are about. 
Sir, I deny the charge. I have seen a wax figure of Cobbett, 
boys, at Madame Tussaud's Exhibition." Charles, Sir, boys, are 
here said to be in the independent case, because they have no 
bearing on any other part of the sentence. These words may, 
however, be resolved into the nominative case, thus: To you, 
whose name is Charles, I have this to say: mind what you are 
about. To you, who are a Sir — to you, who are boys, etc. 
Remember, therefore, that any word standing alone like these, or 
in an exclamation — O Roscoe! Roscoe! what an ass you have 
made of yourself! — is said to be in the independent case. 

192. Owing to not seeing the use and power of this it 
in their true light, many persons, after long puzzling, 
think they must make the pronouns which immediately 
follow conform to the cases which the verbs and pre- 
positions of the sentence demand. " It is them, and not 
the people, whom I address myself to. 1 ' "It was him, 
and not the other man, that I sought after" The prepo- 
sitions to and after demand an objective case; and they 
have it in the words whom and that. The Pronouns 
which follow the it and the verb to be must always be in 
the nominative case. And, therefore, in the above ex- 
amples, it should be, "It is they, and not the other 
people;" "It was he, and not the other man." 

193. This it with its verb to be is sometimes employed 
with the preposition for, with singular force and effect. 
"It is for the guilty to live in fear, to skulk and to hang 



126 Syntax, 

their heads : but for the innocent it is to enjoy ease and 

tranquillity of mind, to scorn all disguise, and to carry 
themselves erect." This is much more forcible than to 
say ? "The guilty generally live in fear." and so on, 
throughout the sentence. The word for. in this case. 
denotes appropriateness, or fitness ; and the full expres- 
sion would be this: "To the state of being, or state of 
things called guiltiness, to live in fear is fitting, or is 
appropriate." If you pay attention to the reason on which 
the use of these words is founded, you will never be at a 
loss to use them properly. 

194. The word it is the greatest troubler that I know 
of in language. It is so small, and so convenient, that 
few are careful enough in using it. "Writers seldom spare 
this word. Whenever they are at a loss for either a nomi- 
native or an objective to their sentence, they, without any 
kind of ceremony, clap in an it. A very remarkable in- 
stance of this pressing of poor it into actual service, con- 
trary to the laws of grammar and of sense, occurs in a 
piece of composition, where we might, with justice, insist 
on correctness. This piece is on the : of grammar; 

it is a piece written by a doctor of d . and read by 

him to students in grammar and language in an academy; 
and the very sent- it I am now about to quote is 

selected, by the author of a grammar, as testimony of 
high authority in favor of the excellence of his work. 
Surely, if correctness be ever to be expected, it must be 
in a case like this. I allude to two sentences in * 
"Charge of the Reverent Do: top, Abeecrombie to ' 
Senior Class of the Philadelphia Academy." published in 
1806; which sentences have been selected and published 
by Mr. Lindley Murray, as a testimonial of the merits of 
his grammar ; and which sentences are. by Mr. Murray. 
given to us in the following words : " The unwearied 
exertions of this gentleman have done more towards elu- 
cidating the obscurities, and embelhshing the structure 



As Relating to Pronouns. 127 

of our language, than any other tcriter on the subject. 
Such a icork has long been wanted ; and, from the success 
with which it is executed, cannot be too highly appre- 
ciated. 1 ' 

195. As, in the learned Doctor's opinion, obscurities 
can be elucidated, and, as, in the same opinion, Mr. Mur- 
ray is an able hand at this kind of work, it would not be 
amiss were the graniniarian to try his skill upon this 
article from the hand of his dignified eulogist ; for here 
is, if one may use the expression, a constellation of 
obscurities. Our poor oppressed it, which we find forced 
into the Doctor's service in the second sentence, relates 
to "such a work" though this work is nothing that has 
an existence, notwithstanding it is said to be " executed." 
In the first sentence, the " exertions " become, all of a 
sudden, a " writer /" the exertions have done more than 
" any other writer ;" for, mind you, it is not the gentleman 
that has done anything ; it is " the exertions " that have 
done what is said to be done. The word gentleman is in 
the possessive case, and has nothing to do with the action 
of the sentence. Let us give the sentence a turn, and 
the Doctor and the grammarian will hear how it will 
sound. " This gentleman's exertions have done more 
than any other writer" This is upon a level with "This 
gentleman's dog has killed more hares than any other 
sportsman" No doubt Doctor Abercbombie meant to 
say, "the exertions of this gentleman have done more 
than those of any other writer. Such a work as this 
gentleman's has long been wanted: his work, seeing the 
successful manner of its execution, cannot be too highly 
commended." Meant! Xo doubt at all of that! And 
when we hear a Hampshire ploughboy say, " Poll Cherry- 
cheek have giv'd I thick handkecher," we know very well 
that he means to say, " Poll Cherrycheek has given me 
this handkerchief ;" and yet, we are but too apt to laugh 
at him, and to call him ignorant ; which is wrong; be- 



128 Syntax, 

cause he has no pretensions to a knowledge of grammar, 
and he may be very skillful as a ploughboy. However, 
we will not laugh at Doctor Abekcrombie, whom I knew, 
many years ago, for a very kind and worthy man, and 
who baptized your elder brother and elder sister. But if 
we may, in any case, be allowed to laugh at the ignorance 
of our fellow-creatures, that case certainly does arise when 
we see a professed grammarian, the author of voluminous 
precepts and examples on the subject of grammar, pro- 
ducing, in imitation of the possessors of invaluable medi- 
cal secrets, testimonials vouching for the efficacy of his 
literary panacea, and when, in those very testimonials, we 
find most flagrant instances of bad grammar. 

196. However, my dear James, let this strong and 
striking instance of the misuse of the word it serve you 
in the way of caution. Never put an it upon paper with- 
out thinking well of what you are about. When I see 
many its in a page, I always tremble for the writer. 

197. We now come to the second class of Pronouns ; 
that is so say, the Relative Pronouns, of which you have 
had some account in Letter VI, paragraphs 62, 63, 64, 
65, and 66 ; which paragraphs you should now read over 
again with attention. 

198. Who, which becomes whose in the possessive case, 
and whom in the objective case, is, in its use, confined to 
rational beings; for though some writers do say, "the 
country whose fertility is great," and the like, it is not 
correct. We must say, "the country the fertility of 
which" But if we personify ; if, for instance, we call a 
nation a she, or the sun a he, we must then, if we have 
need of relative Pronouns, take these, or the word that, 
which is a relative applicable to rational as well as irra- 
tional and even inanimate beings. 

It is now correct to say "the country whose fertility is great;" 
for it is a much more direct and easy way of speaking than the 
other. This form was begun by the poets, and is now constantly 
used by prose-writers. 



As Relating to Pronouns. 129 

199. The errors which are most frequent in the use of 
these relative Pronouns arise from not taking care to use 
who and whom, when they are respectively demanded by 
the verbs or prepositions. "To tcho did you speak? 

Whom is come to-day?" These sentences are too glar- 
ingly wrong to pass from our pens to the paper. But, as 
in the case of personal Pronouns, when the relatives are 
placed, in the sentence, at a distance from their ante- 
cedents, or verbs or prepositions, the ear gives us no 
assistance. " Who, of all the men in the world, do you 
think I saw, the other day? Who, for the sake of. his 
numerous services, the office was given to." In both 
these cases it ought to be whom. Bring the verb in the 
first, and the preposition in the second case, closer to the 
relative ; as, who I sovi / to who the office was given ; 
and you will see the error at once. But take care! 
" Whom of all men in the world, do you think teas chosen 
to be sent as an ambasssador? Whom, for the sake of 
his numerous services, had an office of honor bestowed 
upon him." These are nominative cases, and ought to 
have who ; that is to say, " who was chosen ; who had an 
office." I will not load you with numerous examples. 
Read again about the nominative and objective cases in 
Letter V. Apply your reason to the subject. Who is 
the nominative, and whom the objective. Think well 
about the matter, and you will want no more examples. 

200. There is, however, an erroneous way of employing 
whom, which I must point out to your particular atten- 
tion, because it is so often seen in very good writers, and 
because it is very deceiving. "The Duke of Argyle, 
than whom no man was more hearty in the cause." 
" Cromwell, than who?n no man was better skilled in arti- 
fice." A hundred such phrases might be collected from 
Hume, Blackstone, and even from Doctors Blair and 
Johnson. Yet they are bad grammar. In all such cases, 
who should be made use of ; for it is nominative and not 

6* 



130 Syntax, 

objective. "No man was more hearty in the cause than 
he toasy no man was better skilled in artifice than he 
icas" It is a very common Parliament-house phrase, and 
therefore presumptively corrupt/ but it is a Doctor 
Johnson phrase too; "Pope, than whom few men had 
more vanity." The Doctor did not say, "Myself, than 
whom few men have been found more base, having, in my 
Dictionary, described a pensioner as a slave of state, and 
having afterwards myself become a pensioner." 

201. I differ, as to this matter, from Bishop Lowth, 
who says that " the relative who, having reference to no 
verb or preposition understood, but only to its antece- 
dent, when it follows than, is always in the objective case; 
even though the Pronoun, if substituted in its place, 
would be in the nominative." And then he gives an in- 
stance from Milton. "Beelzebub, than whom, Satan 
except, none higher sat." It is curious enough that this 
sentence of the Bishop is, itself, ungrammatical ! Our 
poor unfortunate it is so placed as to make it a matter of 
doubt whether the Bishop meant it to relate to who, or to 
its antecedent. However, we know his meaning; but, 
though he says that who, when it follows than, is always 
in the objective case, he gives us no reason for this de- 
parture from a clear general principle ; unless we are to 
regard as a reason the example of Milton, who has com- 
mitted many hundreds, if not thousands, of grammatical 
errors, many of which the Bishop himself has pointed out. 
There is a sort of side-wind attempt at a reason in the 
words, "having reference to no verb or preposition under- 
stood." I do not see the reason, even if this could be ; 
for it appears to me impossible that a Noun or Pronoun 
can exist in a grammatical state without having reference 
to some verb or preposition, either expressed or under- 
stood. What is meant by Milton? "Than Beelzebub 
none sat higher, except Satan." And when, in order to 
avoid the repetition of the word Beelzebub, the relative 



As Relating to Pronouns. 131 

becomes necessary, the full construction must be, "no 
devil sat higher than tcho sat, except Satan;" and not 
"no devil sat higher than whom sat." The supposition 
that there can be a Noun or Pronoun which has reference 
to no verb, and no preposition, is' certainly a mistake. 

Mr. Swinton quotes these two sentences about Pope and Beelze- 
bub, and then says: "This construction must be regarded as 
anomalous; but it has been used by so many reputable authors 
that we can scarcely refuse to accept it." It seems to me that this 
is one of those cases where long usage has made a faulty expression 
appear or sound correct ; just as there are many people who think 
''it is me" sounds much better than "it is I." I am sure "than 
whom" is now much more rarely used than formerly. 

202. That, as a relative, may, as we have seen, be ap- 
plied either to persons or things ; but it has no possessive 
case, and no change to denote the other two cases. We 
say, "the man that gives, and the man that a thing is 
given to." But there are some instances when it can 
hardly be called proper to use that instead of who or 
whom. Thus, directly after a proper name, as in Hume : 
"The Queen gave orders for taking into custody the 
Duke of Northumberland, who fell on his knees to the 
Earl of Arundel, that arrested him." Who would have 
been much better, though there was a who just before in 
the sentence. In the same author: "Douglas, vjho had 
prepared his people, and that was bent upon taking his 
part openly." This never ought to be, though we see it 
continually. Either may do : but both never ought to be 
relatives of the same antecedent, in the same sentence. 
And, indeed, it is very awkward, to say the least of it, to 
use both in the same sentence, though relating to different 
antecedents, if all these be names of rational beings. " The 
Lords, who made the first false report, and the Commons, 
that seemed to vie with their Lordships in falsehood, be- 
came equally detested." That, as a relative, cannot take 
the preposition or verb immediately before it. I may say 
" The man to vihom I gave a book ; " but I cannot say, "the 



134: Syntax, 

206. Which, though in other cases it cannot be em- 
ployed as a relative with nouns which are the names of 
rational beings, is, with such nouns, employed in asking 
questions ; as, ' ; The tyrants allege that the petition was 
disrespectful. Which of the tyrants?" Again: " One of 
the petitioners had his head cleaved by the yeomanry. 

Which?" That is to say, "Which of the petitioners 
was it?" 

207. What, when used in asking for a repetition of 
what has been said — as, what? — means, "Tell me that 
which, or the thing tchich, you have said.'' This word is 
used, and with great force, in the way of exclamation: 
u What! rob us of our right of suffrage, and then, when 
we pray to have our right restored to us, shut us up in 
dungeons !" The full meaning is this : " What do they do ? 
They rob us of our right.*' 

208. It is not, in general, advisable to crowd these rela- 
tives together ; but it sometimes happens that it is done. 
" Who, that has any sense, can believe such palpable false- 
hoods? What, that can be invented, can disguise these 
falsehoods? By whom, that you ever heard of, was a par- 
don obtained from the mercy of a tyrant ? Some men's 
rights have been taken from them by force and by genius, 
but whose, that the world ever heard of before, were taken 
away by ignorance and stupidity?" 

209. Whosoever, ivhosesoever, whomsoever, whatsoever, 
whichsoever, follow the rules applicable to the original 
words. The so is an adverb, which, in its general accep- 
tation, means in like manner ; and ever, which is also an 
adverb, means, at any time, at all times, or always. These 
two words, thus joined in whosoever, mean, icho hi any 
case that may be ; and so of the other three words. We 
sometimes omit the so, and say, whoever, ichomever, what- 
ever, and even whosever. It is a mere abbreviation. The 
so is understood ; and it is best not to omit to write it. 
Sometimes the soever is separated from the Pronoun: 



As Relating to Pronouns. 135 

" What man soever he might be." But the main thing is 
to understand the reason "upon which the use of these 
words stands ; for, if you understand that, you will always 
use the words properly. 

210. The Demonstrative Pronouns have been described 
in Letter VI, paragraph 67 ; and I have very little to add 
to what is there said upon the subject. They never 
change their endings to denote gender or case ; and the 
proper application of them is so obvious that it requires 
little to be said about it. However, we shall hear more of 
these Pronouns when we come to the Syntax of Verbs. 
One observation I will make here, however, because it will 
serve to caution you against the commission of a very 
common error. You will hardly say, "Them that write;" 
but you may say, as many do, " We ought always to have 
great regard for them who are wise and good." It 
ought to be, "for those who are wise and good ;" because 
the word persons is understood : " those persons who are 
wise and good ;" and it is bad grammar to say, " them per- 
sons who are wise and good." But observe, in another 
sense, this sentence would be correct. If I be speaking 
of particular persons, and if my object be to make you 
understand that they are wise and good, and also that I 
love them ; then I say, very correctly, "I love them, who 
are wise and good. 1 ' Thus : " The father has two children ; 
he loves them, who are wise and good ; and they love him, 
who is very indulgent." It is the meaning that must be 
your guide, and reason must tell you what is the meaning. 
" They, who can write, save a great deal of bodily labor," 
is very different from "Those who can write save a great 
deal of bodily labor.' 1 The those stands for those persons ; 
that is to say, any persons, persons in general, who can 
write: whereas, the they, as here used, relates to some 
particular persons; and the sentence means that these 
particular persons are able to write, and, by that means, 
they save a great deal of bodily labor. Doctor Blair, in 



136 Syntax, 

his 21st Lecture, has fallen into an error of this sort: 

thus. " TLese two paragraphs are extremely worthy of 

Me. Addison, and exhibit a style, which they, who can 

successfully imitate, may esteem themselves happy.'' It 

ought to be those instead of they. But this is not the 

only fault in this sentence. "Why say >ely worthy T 

Worthiness is a quality which hardly admits of degrees, 

and rarely :: does not admit of east Then, again, 

ia tc 'ize, to set value on, to 

value highly. How. then, can men "esteem themselves 

happy?" How can they prize themselves happy? How 

can they highly va My dear James, 

liambermaids, and members of the House of Commons, 

and learned Doctors, writ be you content with 

plain words which convey your meaning ; say that a thing 

worthy of a man: and that men may deem them- 

lappy. — It is truly curious that Lindley Murray 

should, even in the motto in the title-page of his English 

i^tence containing a gram- 
ry still more curious that he should have 
found tiiis sentence in Doctor Blair's Lectures on Lan- 
guage ; and most curious of all that this sentence should 
be intended to inculcate the grt ctness in 

the composing of sentences. Here, however, are the 
proofs of this combination of curious circumstances: 
• 7 ; - / who are learning to compose, and arrange their 
B8 with accuracy and order, are learning, at the 
same time, to think with accuracy and order." Poh! 
Never think a man either learned *or good merely on 
account of his being called a Doctor. 

211. The Indeterminate Pronouns have been enumerated 
in Letter VI. parapraph 71. They are sometimes Adjec- 
ated in that paragraph. Whoever, whatever, 
and whichever (that is, wh &er, whichso- 

. though relatives, are indeterminate too. But, in- 
deed, it signifies little how these words are classed. It 



As Relating to Pronouns. 137 

is the use of them that we ought to look to. Every, 
which I have now reckoned amongst these Pronouns, is 
never, now-a-days, used icithout a noun, and is therefore, 
in fact, an -adjective. The error that is most frequently 
committed in using these Pronouns is the putting -of the 
plural verb or plural Pronoun after nouns preceded by 
every, each, or either; especially in the case of every : as, 
" every man ; every body ; every house." These are under- 
stood to mean, all the men, all fas people, all the houses; 
but, only one man, one body, one house, is spoken of, and 
therefore the verb ought to be in the singular ; as, " every- 
body is disgusted;" and not "everybody are disgusted." 

212. Before you use any of these words, you should 
think well on their true meaning; for, if you do this, you 
will seldom commit errors in the use of them. Doctor 
Johnson, in his Rambler, No. 177, has this passage: 
"Every one of these virtuosos looked on all his associates 
as wretches of depraved taste and narrow notions. Their 
conversation was, therefore, fretful and waspish, their be- 
havior brutal, their merriment bluntly sarcastic, and their 
seriousness gloomy and suspicious." Xow these theirs 
certainly relate to every one, though the author meant, 
without doubt, that they should relate to the whole body 
of virtuosos, including the every one. The word there- 
fore adds to the confusion. The virtuosos were, there- 
fore, fretful and waspish. What for ? Was it because 
every one saw his associates in a bad light? How can my 
thinking meanly of others make their conversation fretful? 
If the Doctor had said, "These virtuosos looked on each 
other "... the meaning would have been clear. 

213. The Pronoun either, which means one of two, is 
very often improperly employed. It is sometimes used 
to denote one of three or more, which is always incorrect. 
We say, "either the dog, or the cat f but not "either the 
dog, the cat, or the pig.' Suppose some one to ask me 
which I choose to have, mutton, veal, or woodcock; I 



138 

answer any one of them : and not either of them. Doctor 
Blair has used any one where he ought to have used 
either: "The two words are : al: :_;e:her - - nymous ; 
yet. in the present case, any one of them would have been 
sufficient." 

214. In concluding this Letter on the Syntax of Pro- 
nouns, I must observe that I leave many of these inde- 
terminate Pronouns unnoticed in a particular manner. 
To notice every one individually could answer no purr 
except that ■:■: spelling the size of a book: a thing which 
I most ar.xi:a:->- ~:-h : :• -?^:i r \ 

Sometimes one cannot help using either . . . oe with reference 
to one of three things. Expressions like the following wiD 
be found in the works of the best anthem Ether the Ramans, 
the Greeks, or the Persians. Neither the planters, the poor 
whites, nor the blacks. 

Nearly all the grammars set down the rule that one must use 
each other with reference to two persons, and one another with refer- 
ence to more than two. I have not, however, found a single author, 
good or bad, that adheres to this rule. When y speaking of 

three persons, it is perhaps bet: They love one anoth 

than "They love each other;" but sometimes these words hsv 
be repeated so frequently that it would be very disagreeable to use 
always the same word. In Punch's Address to Brother Jonathan, 
these words occur almost interchangeably: "Let us quarrel, Ameri- 
can kinsmen. Let us plunge into war. We have been friends too 
long. We have too highly promoted each other's wealth and [ 
perity. We are too plethoric ; we want depletion ; to which end 
let us cut one another's throats. Let us sink each other's shipping, 
burn each other's arsenals, destroy each other's property at lai 
Let our banks break while we smite and slay one another. Let us 
maim and mutilate one another; let us make of each other miserable 
objects," etc — Notice that each has a restricting sense, and every an 
ex rnded or general one. "He examined each one; he exam: 
every one." The first means each single one; the second m 
them ally in a general sense. "Here are ten lazy L 
one a caning. Give a caning to every lazy boy in the school." 

That error of making verbs and pronouns agree with each and 
every,, as if these words were plural, is as common to-day as it was 
in Cobbett's time. How often we hear such e is as, 



As Relating to Adjectives. 139 

" Everybody have their faults — Every one are dissatisfied — Let 
each boy and girl take up their pens," etc. These are all wrong. 
Even if the noun with each or every be repeated, the verb or pro- 
noun must be in the singular ; as, " Each day and each hour has 
its duties ; every man and woman has his or her peculiarities ; every 
window and every house-top was crowded with spectators." Be- 
cause, in these instances, the predicate or verb is understood after 
the first noun : Every window was crowded and every house-top 
was crowded. 



LETTER XVIII. 

SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO ADJECTIVES. 

215. By this time, my dear James, you will hardly want 
to be reminded of the nature of Adjectives. However, it 
may not be amiss for you to read again attentively the 
whole of Letter VII. 

216. Adjectives, having no relative effect, containing no 
representative quality, have not the dangerous power, 
possessed by pronouns, of throwing whole sentences into 
confusion, and of perverting or totally destroying the 
writer's meaning. For this reason, there is little to be 
said respecting the using of Adjectives. 

217. When you make use of an Adjective in the way of 
comparison, take care that there be a congruity, or fitness, 
in the things or qualities compared. Do not say that a 
thing is deeper than it is broad or long; or that a man is 
taller than he is wise or rich. Hume says, " The principles 
of the Reformation were deeper in the prince's mind than 
to be easily eradicated." This is no comparison at all. 
It is nonsense. 

218. "When Adjectives are used as nouns, they must, in 
all respects, be treated as nouns. " The guilty, the inno- 
cent, the rich, the poor, are mixed together. 1 ' But we 
cannot say " a guilty,' 1 meaning to use the word guilty as 
a noun. 



140 Syntax, 

219. If wo or more Adjectives be used as applicable to 
the same noun, there must be a comma, or commas, to 
separate them ; as, " a poor, unfortunate man ;" unless and 
or or be made use of, for then the comma or commas may 
be omitted ; as, " a lofty and large and excellent house." 

220. Be rather S23aring than liberal in the use of Adjec- 
tives. One which expresses your meaning is better than 
two, which can, at best, do no more than express it, while 
the additional one may possibly do harm. But the error 
most common in the use of Adjectives is the endeavoring 
to strengthen the Adjective by putting an adverb before 
it, and which adverb conveys the notion that the quality 
or property expressed by the Adjective admits of degrees ; 
as, " very honest, extremely just." A man may be wiser 
than another wise man ; an act may be more toieked than 
another wicked act; but a man cannot be more honest 
than another ; every man who is not honest must be dis- 
honest ; and every act which is not just must be unjust. 
"Very right, 11 and "very wrong, 11 are very common ex- 
pressions, but they are both incorrect. Some expressions 
may be more common than others ; but that which is not 
right is wrong; or that which is not virong is right. 
There are here no intermediate degrees. We should laugh 
to hear a man say, " You are a little right, I am a good 
deal wrong; that person is honest in a trifling degree; 
that act was too just." But our ears are accustomed to 
the adverbs of exaggeration. Some writers deal in these 
to a degree that tires the ear and offends the understand- 
ing. With them, everything is excessively or immensely 
or extremely or vastly or surprisingly or wonderfully or 
abundantly, or the like. The notion of such writers is 
that these words give strength to what they are saying. 
This is a great error. Strength must be found in the 
thought, or it will never be found in the words. Big- 
sounding words, without thoughts corresponding, are 
effort without effect. 



As Relating to Adjectives. 141 

221. Care must be taken, too, not to use such adjectives 
as are improper to be applied to the nouns along with 
which they are used. " Good virtues ; bad vices ; painful 
tooth-aches; pleasing pleasures." These are staringly 
absurd; but, amongst a select society of empty heads, 
" moderate Reform " has long been a fashionable expres- 
sion; an expression which has been well criticised by 
asking the gentlemen who use it how. they would like to 
obtain moderate justice in a court of law, or to meet with 
moderate chastity in a wife. 

222. To secure yourself against the risk of committing 
such errors, you have only to take care to ascertain the 
full meaning of every word you employ. 

To show you how easy our English is, in this part of its gram- 
mar, as compared with other languages, I shall ask you to look at 
this one little sentence: u The good boy loves a good book and a 
good friend; to good bread and butter he gives not a thought." 
Here the adjective good occurs four times without ever once chang- 
ing its form ; now you will see that this little word, in this one 
little sentence, changes five different times in German : Der gute 
Knabe liebt ein gutes Buch und einen guten Freund ; gutem Brod 
und guter Butter gibt er keinen Gedanken. What do you think 
of that, my lad ? Would you not think that the poor German, 
when he speaks, would be constantly thinking of his genders, 
numbers, and cases? Would you not think he would be apt to 
get things mixed? But he doesn't; he speaks his language in 
correct form, as naturally as a canary-bird sings in correct tune ; 
for he has learned to speak as the canary has learned to sing. 

This is why some writers, like Mr. Grant White, say that the 
English language has no grammar; that is, because its words have 
few or no declensions, or changes to indicate person, number, gen- 
der, case, mood, and tense. It has, however, a grammar of its 
own ; and the proof of it is this : Notwithstanding the fact that it 
has so few declensions, as compared with German, it is just as 
hard, if not harder, for an adult German to learn to speak and 
write our English in a perfectly correct and idiomatic manner, 
as it is for an adult American or Briton to learn to speak and write 
German in a similar manner. Of the two or three millions of 
native Germans who are now in the United States, how many of 



142 Syntax, 

them, do you think, are able to speak our English in such a man- 
ner as to have their words taken down on the spot, and printed 
just as spoken? I do not think there are half a dozen; I know of 
but one ; and that is Mr. Cael Schuez. When I say native Ger- 
mans, I mean, of course, those who, like him, have come to this 
country and learned the language after attaining manhood. Those 
who come here in infancy, or in childhood, become, in fact, Ameri- 
cans. Of the others, not one in ten thousand ever learns to speak 
like a native. As an offset to Mr. Schurz, we have at least one 
American who may be said to have spoken and written German 
as perfectly as Mr. Schurz speaks and writes English ; and that is 
our lamented Bayaed Tayloe. 

It is very easy to learn enough English to talk about one's daily 
wants ; to ask for meat and drink ; to count money ; to buy and 
sell ; and to inquire one's way ; it is far easier for a German to 
learn this much in English than for an American to learn as much 
in German; but it is, I think, as hard for the German to master the 
English as it is for the Englishman to master the German. The Ger- 
man language, in utterance and in construction, is, like the people 
who speak it, almost as regular, formal, and law-conforming as 
mathematics ; while our English, in utterance and in construction, 
is, like the typical Englishman, though grounded in law and prin- 
ciple, essentially a mass of peculiarities, irregularities, and eccen- 
tricities. 



LETTER XIX. 

SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO VERBS. 

223. Let us, my dear James, get well through this Let- 
ter ; and then we may, I think, safely say that we know 
something of grammar: a little more, I hope, than is 
known by the greater part of those who call themselves 
Latin and Greek scholars, and who dignify their having 
studied these languages with the name of "Liberal Edu- 
cation." 

224. There can be no sentence, there can be no sense 
in words, unless there be a Verb either expressed or un- 
derstood. Each of the other Parts of Speech may alter- 



As Relating to Verbs. 143 

nately be dispensed with ; but the Verb never can. The 
Verb being, then, of so much importance, you will do well 
to read again, before you proceed further, paragraphs 23, 
24, 25, and 26, in Letter HI, and the whole of Letter 

vin. 

225. Well, then, we have now to see how Verbs are 
used in sentences, and how a misuse of them affects the 
meaning of the writer. There must, you will bear in 
mind, always be a Verb expressed or understood. One 
would think that this was not the case in the direction 
written on a post letter. "To John Goldsmith, Esq., 
Hambledon, Hampshire." But what do these words 
really mean? Why, they mean, "This letter is to be 
delivered to John Goldsmith, who is an Esquire, who lives 
at Hambledon, which is in Hampshire." Thus, there are 
no less than five Verbs where we thought there was no 
Verb at all. " Sir, I beg you to give me a bit of bread." 
The sentence which follows the Sir is complete ; but the 
Sir appeal's to stand wholly without connection. How- 
ever, the full meaning is this : "I beg you, who are a Sir, 
to give me a bit of bread." "What, John?" That is to 
say, " What is said by you, whose name is John?" Again, 
in the date of a letter; "Long Island, March 25, 1818." 
That is : "7" am now writing in Long Island ; this is the 
twenty-fifth day of March, and this month is in the one 
thousand eight hundred and eighteenth year of the Chris- 
tian era." 

226. Now, if you take time to reflect a little on this 
matter, you will never be puzzled for a moment by those 
detached words, to suit which grammarians have invented 
vocative cases and cases absolute, and a great many other 
appellations, with which they puzzle themselves, and 
confuse and bewilder and torment those who read their 
books. (See paragraph 191.) 

227. We almost always, whether in speaking or in writ- 
ing, leave out some of the words which are necessary to a 



144 Syntax, 

full expression of our meaning. This leaving out is called 
the Ellipsis. Ellipsis is, in geometry, an oval figure ; and 
the compasses, in the tracing of the line of this figure, 
do not take their full sweep all round, as in the tracing of 
a circle, but they make skips and leave out parts of the 
area, or surface, which parts would be included in the 
circle. Hence it is, that the shipping over, or leaving out, 
in speaking or in writing, is called het Ellipsis ; without 
making use of which, we, as you will presently see, 
scarcely ever open our lips or move our pens. " He told 
me that he had given John the gun which the gunsmith 
brought the other night." That is: "He told to me that 
he had given to John the gun, which the gunsmith brought 
to this place, or hither, on the other night." This would, 
you see, be very cumbrous and disagreeable ; and, there- 
fore, seeing that the meaning is quite clear without the 
words marked by italics, we leave these words out. But 
we may easily go too far in this elliptical way, and say: 
"He told me he had given John the gun the gunsmith 
brought the other night." This is leaving the sentence 
too bare, and making it to be, if not nonsense, hardly 
sense. 

228. Reserving some further remarks, to be made by- 
and-by, on the Ellipsis, I have now to desire that, always, 
when you are examining a sentence, you will take into 
your view the words that are left out. If you have any 
doubt as to the correctness of the sentence, fill it up by 
putting in the left-out words, and, if there be an error you 
will soon discover it. 

229. Keeping in mind these remarks on the subject of 
understood words, you will now listen attentively to me, 
while I endeavor to explain to you the manner in which 

Verbs ought to be used in sentences. 

230. The first thing is to come at a clear understanding 
with regard to the cases of nouns and pronouns as con- 
nected, in use, with Verbs and prepositions ; for on this 



As Relating to Verbs. 145 

connection depends a great deal. Verbs govern, as it is 
called, nouns and pronouns; that is to say, they some- 
times cause, or make, nouns or pronouns to be in a cer- 
tain case. JVouns do not vary their endings to denote 
different cases ; but pronouns do ; as you have seen in 
Letter VI. Therefore, to illustrate this matter, I will 
take the pronoun personal of the third person singular, 
which in the nominative case is he, possessive case his, 
objective case him. 

231. When a man (it is the same with regard to any 
other person or thing) is the actor, or doer, the man is in 
the nominative case, and the corresponding pronoun is 
he; "He strikes." The same case exists when the man is 
the receiver or endurer, of an action. "He is stricken." It 
is still the same case when the man is said to be in any 
state or condition. "He is unhappy." Indeed, there is 
no difference in these two latter instances; for "he is 
stricken" is no other than to say that "he is in a state or 
condition called stricken." Observe, too, that in these two 
latter instances, the he is followed by the Verb to be : he 
is stricken, he is unhappy; and observe, moreover, that 
whenever the Verb to be is used, the receiver, or be-er (if 
I may make a word) is, and must be, in the nominative 
case. But now let me stop a little to guard you against 
a puzzle. I say, "the Verb to be;" but I do not mean 
those two words always. When I say the Verb to be, I 
may mean, as in the above examples, is. This is the Verb 
to be in the third person singular. "I write" I should 
say that here is the pronoun J and the Verb to- write ; 
that is to say, it is the Verb to write in one of its forms. 
The to is the sign of the infinitive mode ; and the Verb in 
that state is the root, or the foundation, from which all 
the different parts or forms proceed. Having guarded 
ourselves against this puzzler, let us come back to our 
nominative case. The actor, the doer, the receiver of an 
action, the be-er, must always be in the nominative case ; 
7 



146 

and it is called nominative case because it is that state, or 
situation, or case, in which the person or thing is named 
without being pointed out as the object, or end, of any- 
foregoing action or purpose; as, "he strikes; he is 
stricken; he is unhappy." This word n -'ce is not 

a good word; ad d being case, would be much 

better. This word nominative, like most of the terms 
used in teaching grammar, has been taken from the Latin. 
It is bad : it is inadequate to its intended purpose; but it 
is used; and if we understand its meaning, or, rather, 
what it is designed to mean, its intrinsic insufficiency is 
of no consequence. Thus. I hope, then, that we know 
what the is. "He writes; he sings; he is 

sick j he is well j he is smitten ; he is good ; n and so on, 
always with a he. 

232. But (and now pay attention) if the action pass 
from the actor to a persori or thing acted upon, and if 
there be no part of the Yerb to be employed, then the 
person or thing acted upon is in the objective case; as, 
"He smites him; he strikes him; he kills him." In 
:L-se instances we wish to show, not only an action that 
is performed and the person who performs it, but also the 
person if m it is performed. Here, therefore, we 

and the object ; and the person 
or thing which is the object, is in the objective case. The 
Yerb is said, in such instances, to govern the noun or 
pronoun; that is I to make it, or force it, to be in 

the objective case: and to make us use him instead of he. 
Thia is simply anott&ex way of saying that the transitive verb 

- the noun or pronoun which follows it in the objective case, 
and that a sentence with a transitive verb must consist of subject, 
predi Tarfield defeated Hancock.^ (See par. 48.) 

233. However. I remember that I was very much puz- 
zled on account of these cases. I saw that when "Peter 

- smitten" Peter was in the n ase; but that 
when any person or thing "had smitten Peter.** Peter was 



As Relating to Verbs. 147 

in the objective case. This puzzled rae much; and the 
loose and imperfect definitions of my granimar-book 
yielded me no clue to a disentanglement. Reflection on 
the reason for this apparent inconsistency soon taught 
me, however, that, in the first of these cases, Peter is 
merely named, or nominated as the receiver of an action; 
and that, in the latter instance, Peter is mentioned as 
the object of the action of some other person or thing, 
expressed or understood. I perceived that, in the first 
instance, "Peter is smitten," I had a complete sense. I 
was informed as to the person who had received an action, 
and also as to what sort of action he had received. And 
I perceived that, in the second instance, "John has 
smitten Peter" there was an actor who took possession of 
the use of the Verb, and made Peter the object of it; and 
that this actor, John, now took the nominative, and put 
Peter in the objective case. 

234. This puzzle was, however, hardly got over when 
another presented itself : for I conceived the notion that 
Peter was in the nominative only because no actor was 
mentioned at all in the sentence; but I soon discovered 
this to be an error ; for I found that " Peter is smitten by 
John" still left Peter in the nominative ; and that, if I 
used the pronoun, I must say, "he is smitten by John;" 
and not "him is smitten by John.'' 

235. Upon this puzzle I dwelt a long time: a whole 
week, at least. For I was not content unless I could 
reconcile everything to reason; and I could see no reason 
for this. Peter, in this last instance, appeared to be the 
object, and there was the actor, John. My ear, indeed, 
assured me that it was right to say, "He is smitten by 
John; 1 ' but my reason doubted the information and assur- 
ances of my ear. 

236. At last, the little insignificant word by attracted 
my attention. This word, in this place, is a preposition. 
Ah! that is it! prepositions govern nouns and pronouns; 



148 Syntcux, 

that is to say, make them to be in the objective case! So 
that John, who had plagued me so much, I found to be in 
the objective case ; and I found that, if I put him out, and 
put the pronoun in his place, I must say, " Peter is smit- 
ten by him? 

237. Now, then, my dear James, do you clearly under- 
stand this? If you do not, have patience. Read and 
think, and weigh well every part of what I have here 
written: for, as you will immediately see, a clear under- 
standing with regard to the crises is one of the main inlets 
to a perfect knowledge of grammar. 

As soon as a verb is changed from the active-transitive to the 
passive voice, the subject becomes the object of the sentence ; as, 
" She loves him," active ; " She is loved by him/' passive. 

Be careful to observe the difference between the object and the 
attribute. I remember I could not, for a long time, see the differ- 
ence in such sentences as these : u He is a Jew. She loves a Jew." 
I thought that " a Jew" was, in both instances, the object of the 
verb; but it is not. When I came to learn German, I saw the 
difference at once, and the matter became clear to me. Er ist ein 
Jude. Sie liebt einen Juden. You see that "loves " is a transitive 
verb, whereas "is" is a neuter, or intransitive one. The objective 
case follows a transitive verb, never a neuter or intransitive one. 
What follows the neuter verb, therefore, or any verb naming or 
nominating anybody, is not the object, not anything in the objective 
case; but the attribute — so called because it generally attributes 
something to somebody — and, if a noun, is always in the nomina- 
tive case. " He is a man; he is manly ; he stands a freeman ; he 
remains a prince ; he seems poor ; he appears wealthy ; he looks 
handsome ; he is called The Great Unknown ; he is appointed judge; 
he is elected governor " — in all these cases, what follows the verb is 
an attribute or quality, and, wherever it is a noun, it is in the 
nominative case. Remember, therefore, that nouns following such 
verbs as be, become, seem, appear, stand, walk, and the passive verbs 
is called, is named, is styled, is appointed, is elected, is made, are 
always in the nominative case, and are termed the attribute, or, by 
some grammarians, the complement, of the sentence. 

238. Verbs, of which there must be one, at least, ex- 
pressed or understood, in every sentence, must agree in 



As Relating to Verbs. 149 

person and in number with the nouns or pronouns which 
are the nominatives of the sentence; that is to say, the 
Verbs must be of the same person and same number as 
the nominatives are. Verbs frequently change their forms 
and endings to make themselves agree with the nomina- 
tives. How necessary it is, then, to know what is, and 
what is not, a nominative in a sentence ! Let us take an 
example. "John smite Peter." What are these words? 
John is a noun, third person, singular number, nomina- 
tive case. Smite is a Verb, first person, singular number. 
Peter is a noun, third person, singular number, objective 
case. Therefore, the sentence is incorrect ; for the nomi- 
native, John, is in the third person, and the Verb is in 
the first ; while both ought to be in the same person. 
The sentence ought to be, " John smites Peter ;" and not 
"John smite Peter." 

239. This is, to be sure, a very glaring error ; but still 
it is no more than an error, and is, in fact, as excusable 
as any other grammatical error. " The men lives in the 
country." Here the Verb lives is in the singular number, 
and the noun men, which is the nominative, is in the 
plural number. " The men live in the country," it ought 
to be. These errors stare us in the face. But when the 
sentences become longer, and embrace several nominatives 
and Verbs, we do not so readily perceive the errors that 
are committed. " The intention of the act of Parliament, 
and not its several penalties, decide the character of the 
corrupt assembly by whom it was passed." Here the 
noun penalties comes so near to the Verb decide that the 
ear deceives the judgment. But the noun intention is 
the nominative to the Verb, which therefore ought to be 
decides. Let us take a sentence still more deceiving. 
" Without the aid of a fraudulent paper-money, the tyrants 
never could have performed any of those deeds by which 
their safety have been endangered, and which have, at the 
same time, made them detested." Deeds is the nomina- 



150 Syntax, 

five to the last have and its principal Verb; but safety is 
the nominative to the first have/ and therefore this first 
have ought to have been has. You see that the error 
arises from our having the plural noun deeds in our eye 
and ear. Take all the rest of the sentence away, and 
leave -safety have been" standing by itself, and then the 
error is as flagrant as -John smite Peter." Watch me 
now, in the next sentence. " It must be observed that 
land fell greatly in price as soon as the cheats began to 
draw in their paper-money. In such cases the quantity 
and quality of the land is the same as it was before : but 
the price is reduced all of a sudden, by a change in the 
value and power of the money, which becomes very dif- 
ferent from what it was." Here are two complete sen- 
tences, which go very glibly off the tongue. There is 
nothing in them that offends the ear. The first is, indeed, 
correct; but the last is a mass of error. Quantity and 
quality \ which are the nominatives in the first member of 
the sentence, make, together, a plural, and should have 
been followed, after the word land, by are and not by is; 
and the it mas, which followed, should, of course, have 
been they mere. In the second member of the sentence, 
value and power are the nominatives of becomes, which, 
therefore, should have been become; and then, again, 
there follows an it was, instead of they were. We are 
misled, in such cases, by the nearness of the singular 
noun, which comes in between the nominatives and the 
Verbs. We should not be likely to say, " Quantity and 
quality is; value and power becomes? But when a sin- 
gular noun comes in between such nominatives and the 
Verbs, we are very apt to be thinking of that noun, and 
to commit error. When we once begin, we keep on; 
and if the sentence be long, we get together, at last, a 
fine collection of Verbs and pronouns,- making as complete 
nonsense as heart can wish. Judge Blackstone, in the 
4th Book. Chapter 33, says. " The very scheme and model 



As Relating to, Verbs. 151 

of the administration of common justice, between party 
and party, was entirely settled by this king ; and has con- 
tinued nearly the same to this day.'' Administration of 
common justice was full upon the judge's ear ; down he 
clapped was/ and has naturally followed; and thus, my 
deal' son, in grammar as in moral conduct, one fault 
almost necessarily produces others. 

240. Look, therefore, at your nominative, before you 
put a Verb upon paper; for, you see, it may be one word. 
or two or more words. But observe, if there be two or 
more singular nouns or pronouns, separated by or, which, 
you know, is a disjoining conjunction; then, the Verb 
must be in the singular; as, "A soldier, or a sailor, who 
has served his country faithfully, is fairly entitled to a 
pension ; but who will say that a prostituted peer, a pimp, 
or a buffoon, merits a similar provision from the public?" 

241. It sometimes happens that there are, in the nomi- 
native, two or more nouns, or pronouns, and that they 
are in different numbers, or in different persons / as, "The 
minister or the borough-tyrants" These nouns cannot 
have the Verb to agree with them both. Therefore if it 
be the conspiring of these wretches against the liberties 
of the people, of which we have to speak, we cannot say, 
" The minister or the borough -tyrants conspire / " because 
the Verb would not then agree in number with the noun 
minister / nor can we say conspires / because the Verb 
would not agree with the noun borough-tyrants. There- 
fore, we must not write such sentences; we must say, 
"The minister conspires, or the borough-tyrants conspire, 
against the liberties of the people.'' Repetition is some- 
times disagreeable to the ear ; but it is better to repeat, 
be it ever so often, than to write bad grammar, which is 
only another term for nonsense. 

242. When nominatives are separated by nor, the rule 
of or must be followed. "Neither man nor beast is safe 
in such weather ; *' and not are safe. And if nominatives 



152 Syntax, 

of different numbers present themselves, we must not give 
them a Verb which disagrees with either the one or the 
other. We must not say: "Neither the halter nor the 
bayonets are sufficient to prevent us from obtaining our 
rights." We must avoid this bad grammar by using a 
different form of words; as, "We are to be prevented 
from obtaining our rights by neither the halter nor the 
bayonets." And why should we wish to write bad gram- 
mar, if we can express our meaning in good grammar? 

243. If or or nor disjoin nouns and pronouns of different 
persons, these nouns and pronouns, though they be all of 
the same number, cannot be the nominative of one and 
the same Verb. We cannot say, "They or I am in fault; 
I, or they, or he, is the author of it ; George or I am the 
person." Mr. Lindley Murray says that we may use 
these phrases ; and that we have only to take care that 
the Verb agrees with that person which is placed nearest 
to it ; but he says, also, that it would be better to avoid 
such phrases by giving a different turn to our words. 
I do not like to leave anything to chance or to discretion 
when we have a clear principle for our guide. Fill up the 
sentences, and you will see what pretty work there is. 
" They am in fault, or I am in fault ; I is the author, or 
they is the author, or he is the author ; George am the 
person, or I am the person." Mr. Murray gives a similar 
latitude as to the Verbs used with a mixture of plurals 
and singulars, as mentioned in the foregoing paragraph. 
The truth, I suspect, is, that Mr. Murray, observing that 
great writers frequently committed these errors, thought 
it prudent to give up the cause of grammar, rather than 
seem to set himself against such formidable authority. 
But if we follow this course, it is pretty clear that we 
shall very soon be left with no principle and no rule of 
grammar. 

The grammarians declare that you may say, "Either he or I am 
the guilty one;" or, "He is the guilty one, or I am;" "You or 



As Relating to Verbs. 153 

William is to go;" or, "You are to go, or William is." The eye 
or the ear often decides which is best. "You must not tell us 
what you or anybody else thinks" seems more compact than "You 
must not tell us what you think, or what anybody else thinks" If 
one of the nominatives be negatively used, the verb must be in the 
singular. Thus, "He, and not I, is chosen;" "I, and not they, 
am to go." These are, indeed, correct ; and yet I think it is better 
to say, He is chosen, and not I ; I am to go, and not they. I beg 
you to notice how frequently and nicely Cobbett uses the subjunc- 
tive be after if and though, which is correct, and which now, 
unfortunately, is falling out of use among common writers. 

244. The nominative is frequently a noun of multitude ; 
as, mob, parliament., gang. Now, where this is the case, 
the Verb is used in the singular or in the plural, urjon 
precisely the same principles that the pronouns are so 
used ; and as these principles, together with ample illus- 
trations by the way of example, have been given you in 
Letter XVII, paragraph 181, I need say nothing more of 
the matter. I will just observe, however, that consistency ', 
in the use of the Verb, in such cases, is the main thing to 
keep in view. We may say, "The gang of borough- 
tyrants is cruel ; " or, " that the gang of borough-tyrants 
are cruel ; " but if we go on to speak of their notoriously 
brutal ignorance, we must not say, " The gang of borough- 
tyrants is cruel, and are also notoriously as ignorant as 
brutes." We must use is in both places, or are in both 
places. 

245. In looking for the nominative of a sentence, take 
care that the relative pronoun be not a stumbling-block, 
for relatives have no changes to denote number or person; 
and though they may sometimes appear to be of them- 
selves nominatives, they never can be such. " The men 
who are here, the man who is here ; the cocks that crow, 
the cock that crows." Now, if the relative be the nomi- 
native, why do the Verbs change, seeing that here is no 
change in the relative ? No : the Verb, in pursuit of its 
nominative, runs through the relatives to come at their 

7* 



154 Syntax, 

antecedents, men, man, cocks, cock. Bishop Lowth says, 
however, that "the relative is the nominative when no 
other nominative comes between it and the Verb ; " and 
Mr. Murray has very faithfully copied this erroneous 
observation. " Who is in the house ? Who are in the 
house 1 ? Who strikes the iron? Who strike the iron? 
Who was in the street ? Who were in the street ? " Now, 
here is, in all these instances, no other nominative between 
the relative and the Verb ; and yet the Verb is continually 
varying. Why does it vary? Because it disregards the 
relative and goes and finds the antecedent, and accommo- 
dates its number to that antecedent. The antecedents 
are, in these instances, understood: " What person is in 
the house ? What persons are in the house ? What person 
strikes the iron? What persons strike the iron? What 
person was in the street? What persons were in the 
street ? " The Bishop seems to have had a misgiving in 
his mind, when he gave this account of the nominative 
functions of the relative ; for he adds, " the relative is of 
the same person as the antecedent ; and the Verb agrees 
with it accordingly. 1 ' Oh! oh! but the relative is always 
the same, and is of any and of every number and person. 
How then can the Verb, when it makes its changes in 
number and person, be said to agree with the relative? 
Disagree, indeed, with the relative the Verb cannot any 
more than it can with a preposition ; for the relative has, 
like the preposition, no changes to denote cases ; but the 
danger is that in certain instances the relative may be 
taken for a nominative, without your looking after the 
antecedent, which is the real nominative, and that thus, 
not having the number and person of the antecedent 
clearly in your mind, you may give to the Verb a wrong 
number or person. It is very seldom that those who 
lay down erroneous rules furnish us with examples by 
the means of which we are enabled to detect the error of 
these rules; yet, Mr. Murray has, in the present case, 



As Relating to Verbs. 155 

done this most amply. For in another part of his book 
he has these two examples: "I am the general who give 
the orders to-day. I am the general who gives the orders 
to-day/' Here the antecedent as well as the relative are 
precisely the same ; the order of the words is the same ; 
and yet the words are different. Why? Because, in the 
first example, the pronoun I is the nominative, and in the 
second, the noun general. The first means, "7", who am 
the general here, give the orders to-day/' The second 
means, "The general who gives the orders to-day is I." 
Nothing can more clearly show that the relative cannot 
be the nominative, and that to consider it as a nominative 
must lead to error and confusion. You will observe, 
therefore, that when I, in the Etymology and Syntax as 
relating to relative pronouns, speak of relatives as being 
in the nominative case, I mean that they relate to nouns 
or to personal pronouns v:hich are in that case. The 
same observation applies to the other cases. 

I am strongly inclined to think that Cobbett is in error here. 
The relative pronoun must have person, number, gender, and case, 
like any other pronoun; and who is undoubtedly always of the 
same person and number as the word to which it relates. Let us 
put it directly after all the three persons, singular and plural : 

It is I who speak, or It is I who am speaking. 

It is thou who speakest, " It is thou who art speaking. 
It is he who speaks, " It is he who is speaking. 

It is we who speak, " It is we who are speaking. 

It is you who speak, " It is you who are speaking. 

It is they who speak, " It is they who are speaking. 

Now here each who is of the same person as the pronoun or word 
to which it relates, and consequently the verb agrees with it. 
Strangely enough, the relative pronoun may, as Cobbett says, be 
of any person ; but that does not prevent it from agreeing with its 
antecedent. I used to think that who was always of the third 
person, referring always to somebody spoken of ; but ^iow I see 
that it may be of the first person, referring to somebody who is 
speaking. Nevertheless, we do sometimes hear, It is I who speaks 
German; it is you who speaks Spanish; it is you that speaks 



156 Syntax, 

French. This may be explained by supposing that the full meaning 
of the words is : It is I who am the person that speaks German ; 
it is you who are the person that speaks Spanish. And here again 
each who is of the same person as the antecedent. 

246. We are sometimes embarrassed to fix precisely on 
the nominative, when a sort of addition is made to it by 
words expressing persons or things that accompany it ; 
as, "The Tyrant, with the Spy, have brought Peter to the 
block." We hesitate to determine whether the> Tyrant 
alone is in the nominative, or whether the nominative 
includes the Spy; and of course we hesitate which to 
employ, the singular or the plural Verb ; that is to say, 
has or have. The meaning must be our guide. If we 
mean that the act has been done by the Tyrant himself, 
and that the Spy has been a mere involuntary agent, then 
we ought to use the singular ; but if we believe that the 
Spy has been a co-operator; an associate; an accomplice; 
then we must use the plural of the Verb. "The Tyrant 
with his Proclamation has produced great oppression 
and flagrant violations of law." Has, by all means, in 
this case ; because the proclamation is a mere instrument. 
Give the sentence a turn: "The Tyrant has produced 
great oppression and flagrant violations of the law with 
his proclamation." This is good; but "the Tyrant has 
brought Peter to the block with the Spy," is bad; it 
sounds badly ; and it is bad sense. It does not say what 
we mean it should say. "A leg of mutton, with turnips 
and carrots, is very good." If we mean to say that a leg 
of mutton when cooked with these vegetables, is good, 
we must use is ; but if we be speaking of the goodness 
of a leg of mutton and these vegetables taken together, 
we must use are. When with means along with, together 
with, in company with, and the like, it is nearly the same 
as and ; and then the plural Verb must be used. "He, 
with his bare hand, takes up hot iron." Not, "he, with 
his bare hand, take up." "He, with his brothers, are 



As Relating to Verbs. 157 

able to do much." Not, "is able to do much." If the • 

pronoun be used instead of brothers, it will be in the 
objective case: "He, with them, are able to do much." 
But this is no impediment to the including of the noun 
(represented by them) in the nominative. With, which 
is a preposition, takes the objective case after it; but if 
the persons or things represented by the words coinmj 
after the preposition form part of the actors in a sen- 
tence, the understood nouns make part of the nominatives. 
"The bag, with the guineas and dollar's in it, icere stolen." 
For if we say was stolen, it is possible for us to mean 
that the bag only was stolen. "Sobriety, with great 
industry and talent, enable a man to perform great 
deeds." And not enables ; for sobriety alone would not 
enable a man to do great things. " The borough-tyranny, 
with the paper-money makers, have produced misery and 
starvation." And not has ; for we mean that the two 
have co-operated. "Zeal, with discretion, do much;" and 
not, does much; for we mean, on the contrary, that it 
does nothing. It is the meaning that must determine 
which of the numbers we ought, in all such cases, to 
employ. 

The grammarians are now unanimous in declaring that a phrase 
beginning with the preposition with, coming directly after the 
subject, does not affect the verb, or predicate ; as, The vessel, with 
her crew, was lost ; the regiment, with its officers, was captured : 
the house, with its contents, has been sold; the minister, with his 
cabinet, has resigned; the emperor, with his family, has been 
assassinated; Cobbett, with his Grammar, lias done much good. 
Therefore, it is correct to say, The tyrant, with the spy, has 
brought Peter to the block; he, with his brothers, has done much; 
the bag, with the guineas and dollars in it, was stolen; zeal, with 
discretion, does much. Because, in these instances, "with the 
spy" and "with his brothers" indicate, like the phrase with Ms 
proclamation, merely instruments ; and the sentence about the bag 
of money means simply that the bag was stolen with what it 
contained. The sentence about sobriety means that this virtue, 
employed or combined with other qualities, enables a man to 



158 Syntax, 

perform great deeds ; and that about zeal with discretion must be 
regarded in the same way. Besides, the preposition with puts the 
spy and the brothers, the guineas and the dollars, the industry and 
the talent, in the objective case; and how can any thing in the 
objective case be the subject, which is always in the nominative case ? 
What Cobbett says about the sentence, "He, with his brothers, 
are able to do much," is about as good an example of sophistry as 
any thing I know. For an expression of this kind, see Cobbett's 
account of the sand-hill as an educator, Life, page 261. 

The same is the case with sentences in which the phrase as well as 
occurs. Clay, as well as Webster, was a great orator; Charles, as 
well as his brother, was successful in business ; the father, as well 
as his son, is in fault ; the minutest insect, as well as the largest 
quadruped, derives its life from the same Omnipotent Source. 

247. The Verb to be sometimes comes between two 
nouns of different numbers. "The great evil is the 
borough-debt/' In this sentence there is nothing to 
embarrass us; because evil and borough-debt are both in 
the singular. But, "the great evil is the taxes" is not so 
clear of embarrassment. The embarrassment is the same, 
when there is a singular noun on one side, and two or 
more singulars or plurals on the other side; as, "The 
curse of the country is the profligacy, the rapacity, the 
corruption of the law-makers, the base subserviency of 
the administrators of the law, and the frauds of the 
makers of paper-money/' Now, we mean, here, that these 
things constitute, or form, or make up, a curse. We mean 
that the curse consists of these things; and if we said 
this, there would be no puzzling. "The evil is the taxes." 
That is, the taxes constitute the evil ; but we cannot say, 
"the evil are the taxes ; " nor can we say, that the "curse 
are these things." Avoid, then, the use of the Verb to be 
in all such cases. Say, the curse of the country consists 
of, or arises from, or is produced by. Dr. Blair, in his 
19th Lecture, says: "A feeble, a harsh, or an obscure 
style, are always faults." The or required the singular 
Verb is ; hut faults required are. If he had put is and 
faulty, there would have been no doubt of his being 



As Relating to Verbs. 159 

correct. But as the sentence now stands, there is great 
room for doubt, and, that, too, as to more than one point ; 
for fault means defect, and a style, which is a whole, 
cannot well be called a defect, which mean a want of good- 
ness in a part. Feebleness, harshness, obscurity, are 
faulty. But to call the style itself, to call the ichole thing 
& fault, is more than the Doctor meant. The style may 
be faulty, and yet it may not be a fault. The Doctor's 
work is faulty; but, surely, the work is not a fault! 

248. Lest you should be, in certain instances, puzzled 
to find your nominative case, which, as you now see, con- 
stitutes the main spring and regulator of every sentence, 
I will here point out to you some instances wherein there 
is used, apparently, neither Verb nor nominative. "I?i 
general I dislike to drink wine.- 1 This in general is no 
more, in fact, than one icord. It means generally. But 
sometimes there is a Verb comes in : " generally speaking/' 
Thus : " The borough- tyrants, generally speaking, are 
great fools as well as rogues.'' That is to say, "when we 
speak generally;'' or, "if vie are speaking generally;'' or, 
"when men ox pyeople speak generally." For observe that 
there never can be a sentence without a Verb, expressed 
or understood, and that there never can be a Verb without 
a nominative case, expressed or understood. 

249. Sometimes not only two or more nouns, or pro- 
nouns, may be the nominative of a sentence, but many 
other words along with them may assist in making a 
nominative ; as, " Pitt, Rose, Steele, and their associates, 
giving to Walter a sum of the public money, as a reward 
for libelling the sons of the king, teas extremely profligate 
and base. '' That is to say, this act of Pitt and his asso- 
ciates was extremely profligate and base. It is, when you 
come to inquire, the act which is the nominative, and all 
the other words only go to describe the origin and end of 
the act. 



160 Syntax, 

I doubt very much whether this sentence be correct. Following 
Cobbett's own instructions, let us shorten the sentence, and see 
how U will look then: "Pitt giving Walter a sum of money was 
extremely base." I think this neither looks nor sounds correct. 
It was his act, PiWs act, which was base ; and therefore it should 
be, "Pitt's giving Walter a sum of money was extremely base;" 
that is to say, Pitt's acting was base ; for we cannot say, Pitt act- 
ing was base. We say, "Bacon's drawing up charges against 
Essex was extremely base; John Chinaman's working for low 
wages is the head and front of his offense ;" and not, Bacon draw- 
ing up, etc. — By-the-bye, such sentences as, "The great evil is 
the taxes," are perfectly correct; for the subject is "the evil," 
which is singular, and it makes little matter what the attribute 
may be, for it has nothing to do with the verb. It is precisely the 
same form of expression which we use when we say, It is we ; it 
is you ; it is they ; it is the boys ; it is the rich ; it is the wicked ; 
it is the Italians ; and so on. 

250. You must take care that there be a nominative, 
and that it be clearly expressed or understood. "The 
Attorney- General Gibbs, whose malignity induced him to 
be extremely violent, and teas listened to by the Judges." 
The first Verb induced has a nominative, namely, the 
malignity of the Attorney-General Gibbs; but the was 
has no nominative, either expressed or clearly understood ; 
and we cannot, therefore, tell what or who it was that 
was listened to ; whether the malignity of Gibbs, or Gibbs 
himself. It should have been, and who, or, and he, was 
listened to ; and then we should have known that it was 
Gibbs himself that was listened to. The omitting of the 
nominative, five hundred instances of which I could draw 
from Judge Blackstone and Doctor Johnson, arises very 
often from a desire to avoid a repetition of the noun or 
pronouns ; but repetition is always to be preferred before 
obscurity. 

251. Now, my dear James, I hope that I have explained 
to you, sufficiently, not only what the nominative is, but 
what are its powers in every sentence, and that I have 
imprinted deeply on your mind the necessity of keeping 



As Relating to Verbs. 161 

the nominative constantly in your eye. For want of doing 
this, Judge Blackstoxe has, in Book IV, Chap. 17, com- 
mitted some most ludicrous errors. " Our ancient Saxon 
laics nominally punished theft with death, if above the 
value of twelve-pence ; but the criminal was permitted to 
redeem his life by a pecuniary ransom ; as among their 
German ancestors.'' What confusion is here? Whose 
ancestors? Theirs. Who are they? Why the criminal. 
Theirs, if it retate to anything, must relate to laws ; and 
then the laws have ancestors. Then, what is it that was 
to be of above the value of twelve-pence? The death, or 
the theft? By, "if above the value of twelve-pence," the 
Judge, without doubt, meant, " if the thing stolen were 
above the value of twelve-pence;'' but he says no such 
thing ; and the meaning of the words is, if the death were 
above the value of twelve-pence. The sentence should 
have stood thus: "Our ancient Saxon laws nominally 
punished theft with death, if the thing stolen w T ere above 
the value of twelve-pence; but the criminals were per- 
mitted to redeem their lives by a pecuniary ransom ; as 
among their German ancestors." I could quote, from the 
same author, hundreds of examples of similar errors ; but 
were there only this one to be found in a work which is 
composed of matter which was read, in the way of Lec- 
tures, by a professor of law, to students in the University 
of Oxford, even this one ought to be sufficient to convince 
you of the importance of attending to the precepts which 
I have given you relative to this part of our subject. 

252. As to the objective case, it has nothing to do with 
Verbs ; because a noun which is not in the nominative 
must be in the objective ; and because Verbs do never 
vary their endings to make themselves agree with the 
objective. This case has been sufficiently explained under 
the head of personal pronouns, which have endings to 
denote it. 

253. The possessive case, likewise, has nothing to do 



162 Syntax, 

with Verbs, only you must take care that you do not, in 
any instance, look upon it as a nominative. "The quality 
of the apples were good." No ; it must be was ; for qual- 
ity is the nominative and apples the possessive. "The 
want of learning, talent, and sense are more visible in 
the two houses of Parliament than in any other part of 
the nation." Take care upon all such occasions. Such 
sentences are, as to grammatical construction, very deceiv- 
ing. It should be " is more visible ;" for want is the nomi- 
native ; and learning, talent, and sense are in the posses- 
sive. The want of learning, and so on. 

254. You now know all about the person and number 
of Verbs. You know the reasons upon which are founded 
their variations with regard to these two circumstances. 
Look, now, at the conjugation in Letter VIII, paragraph 
98; and you will see that there remain the Times and 
Modes to be considered. 

255. Of Times there is very little to be said here. All 
the fanciful distinctions of perfect present, more past, and 
more perfect past, and numerous others, only tend to 
bewilder, confuse, and disgust the learner. There can 
be but three times, the present, th.e px^st, the future ; and, 
for the expressing of these, our language provides us 
with words and terminations the most suitable that can 
possibly be conceived. In some languages, which contain 
no little words such as our signs, will, shall, may, and so 
on, the Verbs themselves change their form in order to 
express what we express by the help of these signs. 
In French, for instance, there are two past times. I will 
give you an example in order to explain this matter. 
" The working men, every day, gave money to the tyrants, 
who, in return, gave the working men dungeons and 
axes." Now here is our word gave, which is the past 
time of the Verb to give. It is the same word, you see, 
in both instances; but you will see it different in the 
French. "Tous les jours, les ouvriers donnaient de 



As Relating to Verbs. 163 

l'argent aux tyrants, qui, en retour, donnerent aux ouvriers 
des cachots et des haches." You see that, in one place, 
our give is translated by donna-lent, and in the other 
place, by donnerent. One of these is called, in French, 
the past imperfect, and the other the past perfect. This 
distinction is necessary in the French; but similar dis- 
tinctions are wholly unnecessary in English. 

256. In the Latin language, the Verbs change their 
endings so as to include in the Verbs themselves what we 
express by our auxiliary Yerb to have. And they have 
as many changes, or different endings, as are required to 
express all those various circumstances of time which we 
express by tcork, worked, shall work, may work, might 
work, have worked, had icorked, shall have worked, may 
have worked, might have icorked, and so on. It is, there- 
fore, necessary for the Latins to have distinct appellations 
to suit these various circumstances of time, or states of 
an action ; but such distinction of appellations can be of 
no use to us, whose Verbs never vary their endings to 
express time, except the single variation from the present 
to the past ; for, even as to the future, the signs answer 
our purpose. In our compound times, that is to say, such 
as / have worked, there is the Verb to have, which be- 
comes had, or shall have, and so on. 

257. Why, then, should we perplex ourselves with a 
multitude of artificial distinctions, which cannot, by any 
possibility, be of any use in practice ? These distinctions 
have been introduced from this cause: those who have 
written English Grammars have been taught Latin ; and 
either unable to divest themselves of their Latin rules, or 
unwilling to treat with simplicity that which, if made 
somewhat of a mystery, would make them appear more 
learned than the mass of people, they have endeavored to 
make our simple language turn and twist itself so as 
to become as complex in its principles as the Latin lan- 
guage is. 



164 Syntax, 

258. There are, however, some few remarks to b© made 
with regard to the times of Verbs ; but before I make 
them, I must speak of the participles. Just cast your eye 
again on Letter VIII, paragraphs 97 and 102. Look at 
the conjugations of the Verbs to work, to have, and to be, 
in that same Letter. These participles, you see, with the 
help of to have and to be, form our compound times. I 
need not tell you that I was working means the same as 
I worked, only that the former supposes that something 
else was going on at the same time, or that something 
happened at the time I was working, or that, at least, 
there is some circumstance of action or of existence col- 
lateral with my working ; as, " I was working ichen he 
came; I teas sick while I was working; it rained while 
I was working ; she scolded while I was working." I need 
not tell you the use of do and did ; I need not say that 
I do work is the same as I work, only the former ex- 
presses the action more positively, and adds some de- 
gree of force to the assertion ; and that did work is the 
same as worked, only the former is, in the past time, of 
the same use as do is in the present. I need not dwell 
here on the uses of will, shall, may, might, should, would, 
can, could, and must; which uses, various as they are, 
are as well known to us all as the uses of our teeth and 
our noses ; and to misapply which words argues not only a 
deficiency in the reasoning faculties, but also a deficiency 
in instinctive discrimination. I will not, my dear James, 
in imitation of the learned doctors, pester you with a 
philological examination into the origin and properties of 
words, with regard to the use of which, if you were to 
commit an error in conversation, your brother Eichard, 
who is four years old, would instantly put you right. Of 
all these little words I have said quite enough before; 
but when the Verbs to have and to be are used as auxili- 
aries to principed Verbs, and, especially, when the sen- 
tences are long, errors of great consequence may be com- 



As Relating to Verbs. 165 

mitted ; and, therefore, against these it will be proper to 
guard you. 

And yet, here in the United States, there is no more common 
error than the confounding of shall and will. If you can stick the 
following rule fast in your mind, it will save you from making 
many mistakes in the use of these words : — I sliall, you will, he icill, 
are the forms of the futtjke, and merely foeetell what will take 
place ; I will, you shall, he shall, arc the forms of the potential, 
and express will or determination on the part of the speaker. 
The latter are equal to the German ich will, du sollst, er soil. 
Now try to repeat this rule without looking at the book. Turn it 
over in your mind, and try it in sentences of your own formation. 
Look at the last three paragraphs of Cobbett's Farewell Address to 
his Countrymen, page 159. 

An English nobleman, Sir E. W. Head, has written a whole book 
on these two mighty little words, " Shall and Will," from which the 
following "admirable statement of the true distinction between 
these auxiliaries "* is taken : 

" Will in the first person expresses a resolution or a promise: 'I 
will not go ' = it is my resolution not to go. i I will give it you ' = 
I promise to give it you. Will in the second "person, foretells : 'If 
you come at six o'clock, you will find me at home.' Will in the 
second person, in questions, anticipates a wish or an intention: 
Will you go to-morrow V = Is it your wish or intention to go 
to-morrow ? y Will in the third person foretells, generally implying 
an intention at the same time, when the nominative is a rational 
creature ; ' He will come to-morrow,* signifies what is to take place, 
and that it is the intention of the person mentioned to come. ' I 
think it will snow to-day,' intimates what is, probably, to take 
place. Will must never be used in questions with nominative cases 
of the first person: 'Will we come to-morrow V = Is it our inten- 
tion or desire to come to-morroio f which is an absurd question. We 
must say, Shall we come to-morrow? 

" Would is subject to the same rules as will. Would followed by 
that is frequently used (the nominative being expressed or under- 
stood) to express a wish: ' Would that he had died before this dis- 
grace befell him!' = I wish that he had died before this disgrace befell 
him. Would haze, followed by an infinitive, signifies a desire to do 
or to make ; ' I would have you think of these things 7 = I wish to 
make you think of these things. Would is often used to express a 

*A. S. Hill's Rhetoric, in which I found the above rule and this quotation. 



166 Syntax, 

custom: 'He would often talk about these things' = 'It was his 
custom to talk of these things. 

"Shall in the first person foretells, simply expressing what is to 
take place: 'I shall go to-morrow.' Notice that no intention or 
desire is expressed by shall. Shall, in the first person, in questions, 
asks permission : ' Shall I read ?' = Do you wish me, or tcill you 'per- 
mit me to read? Shall in the second and third persons expresses 
a promise, a command, or a threat: 'You shall have these books 
to-morrow ' = / promise to let you have these books to-morrow. 
1 Thou shalt not steal' = I command thee not to steal. ' He shall 
be punished for this' = I threaten topmnish him for this offense. 

"Should is subject to the same rules as shall. Should frequently 
expresses duty: ' You should not do so ' = It is your duty not to do 
so. Should often signifies a plan : ' I should not do so ' = It icould 
not be my plan to do so. Should often expresses supposition: 
' Should they not agree to the proposals, w r hat must I do ?' = Sup- 
pose that it happen that they will not agree to the proposals." 

If you wish any more on this Head, read any play of Shake- 
speare's, and take down every sentence with will or shall, would or 
should, and learn them by heart. Mr. White, speaking of this very 
matter, says admirably, "The best way is, to give yourself no 
trouble at all about your grammar. Read the best authors, con- 
verse with the best speakers, and know what you mean to say, 
and you will speak and write good English, and may let grammar 
go to its own place!'''' Jacob said to the angel, " I will not let thee 
go till thou hast blessed me." You would say to your servant, "I 
shall let you go if you do your duty." Consider the difference in 
meaning between these two. 

259. Time is so plain a matter ; it must be so well 
known to us, whether it be the present, the past, or the 
future, that we mean to express, that we shall hardly 
say, " We icork," when we are speaking of our having 
worked last year. But you have seen in Letter XVI, 
paragraph 171 (look at it again), that Doctor Blair could 
make a mistake in describing the time of an action. 
Doctor Blair makes use of " it had been better omitted." 
Meaning that it would have been better to omit it. This 
is a sheer vulgarism, like, "I had as lief be killed as 
enslaved." Which ought to be, " I would as lief ." But 
the most common error is the using of the Verb to have 



As Relating to Verbs. 167 

with the passive participle, when the past time, simply, 
or the infinitive of the Verb ought to be used. " Mr. 
Speaker, I expected from the former language and posi- 
tive promises of the Noble Lord and the Eight Honorable 
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to have seen the Bank 
paying in gold and silver." This is House-of- Commons 
language. Avoid it as you would avoid all the rest of 
their doings. I expected to see, to be sure, and not have 
seen, because the have seen carries your act of seeing 
back beyond the period within which it is supposed to 
have been expected to take place. " I expected to have 
ploughed my land last Monday P That is to say, " I last 
Monday was in the act of expecting to have ploughed 
my land before that day." But this is not what the 
writer means. He means to say that, last Monday, or 
before that day, he was in the act of expecting to plough 
his land on that day. " I called on him and wished to 
have submitted my manuscript to him. 1 ' Five hundred 
such errors are to be found in Dr. Goldsmith's works. 
"I- wished, then and there, to submit my manuscript to 
him." I wished to do something there, and did not then 
wish that I had done something before. 

260. "When you use the active participle, take care that 
the times be attended to, and that you do not, by misap- 
plication, make confusion and nonsense. " I had not the 
pleasure of hearing his sentiments when I wrote that 
letter." It should be of having heard ; because the hear- 
ing must be supposed to have been wanted previous to 
the act of writing. This word wanted, and the word 
icanting, are frequently misused. "All that was wanting 
was honesty." It should be wanted. "The Bank is 
weighed in the balance, and found wanting," and not 
wanted. Found to be icanting, or in want; in want of 
money to pay its notes. 

261. I will not fatigue your memory with more examples 
relating to the times of Verbs, Consider well what you 



168 Syntax, 

mean ; what you wish to say. Examine well into the 
true meaning of your words, and you will never make a 
mistake as to the times. "I thought to have heard the 
Noble Lord produce something like proof." No ! my 
dear James will never fall into the use of such senseless 
gabble! Tou would think of hearing something; you 
would expect to hear, not to have heard. Tou would be 
waiting to hear, and not, like these men, be vmiting to 
have heard. "I should have liked to have been informed 
of the amount of the Exchequer Bills." A -phraseology 
like this can be becoming only in those Houses where it 
was proposed to relieve the distresses of the nation by 
setting the laborers to dig holes one day and fill them 
up the next. 

262. It is eiToneous to confound the past time with the 
passive participle of the Verb. But now, before I speak 
of this very common error, let us see a little more about 
the participles. You have seen, in Letter VIII, what the 
participles are ; you have seen that working is the active 
participle, and tcorked the passive participle. We shall 
speak fully of the active by-and-by. The passive parti- 
ciple and the Verb to be, or some part of that Verb, make 
what is called the passive Verb. This is not a Verb which, 
in its origin, differs from an active Verb, in like manner 
as a neuter Verb differs from an active Verb. To sleep is 
neuter in its origin, and must, in all its parts, be neuter ; 
but every active Verb may become a passive Verb. The 
passive Verb is, in fact, that state of an active Verb which 
expresses, as we have seen above, the action as being 
received or endured ; and it is called passive because the 
receiver or endurer of the action is passive; that is to say, 
does nothing. "John smites; John is smitten." Thus, 
then, the passive Verb is no other than the passive parti- 
ciple used along with some part of the Verb to be. 

263. Now, then, let us see a specimen of the errors of 
which I spoke at the beginning of the last paragraph. 



As Relating to Verbs. 169 

When the Verb is regular, there can be no error of this 
sort ; because the past time and the passive participle are 
written in the same manner; as, "John icorked ; John is 
worked." But, when the Verb is irregular, and when the 
past time and the passive participle are written in a 
manner different from each other, there is room for error, 
and error is often committed: "John smote; John is 
smote." This is gross. It offends the ear; but when a 
company, consisting of men who have been enabled, by 
the favor of the late William Pitt, to plunder and insult 
the people, meet under the name of a Pitt Club, to cele- 
brate the birthday of that corrupt and cruel minister, 
those who publish accounts of their festivities always tell 
us, that such and such toasts were drank; instead of 
drunk. I drank at my dinner to-day ; but the milk and 
water which I drank, were drunk by me. In the lists of 
Irregular Verbs, in Letter VIII, the differences between 
the past times and the passive participles are all clearly 
shown. You often hear people say, and see them write, 
"We have spoke; it was spoke in my hearing;" but "we 
have came; it was did" are just as correct. 

It may be well to notice that most of these verbs, like the German 
verbs from which they are derived, change the i to a in the past 
tense, and to u in the past participle. Say, therefore, I sing, sang, 
have sung; I spring, sprang, have 'sprung; I ring, rang, have 
rung; I swim, swam, have swum; I sink, sank, have sunk; and 
so on. But there are a few exceptions; as, to fling, to cling, to 
wring, to sting, which change the i to u in both the past tense and 
the past participle. 

264. Done is the passive participle of to do, and it is 
very often misused. This done is frequently a very great 
offender against grammar. To do is the act of doing. 
We often see people write, "I did not speak, yesterday, 
so well as I wished to have done." Now, what is meant 
by the writer? He means to say that he did not speak 
so well as he then wished, or was wishing, to speak. 



170 Syntax, 

Therefore, the sentence should be, "I did not speak yes- 
terday so well as I wished to do." That is to say, "so 
well as I wished to do it;" that is to say, to do, or to 
perform, the act of speaking. 

265. Take great care not to be too free in your use of 
the Verb to do in any of its times or modes. It is a nice 
little handy word, and, like our oppressed it, it is made 
use of very often when the writer is at a loss for what to 
put down. To do is to act, and, therefore, it never can, 
in any of its parts, supply the place of a neuter Verb. 
Yet, to employ it for this purpose is very common. Dr. 
Blair, in his 23rd Lecture, says : " It is somewhat unfor- 
tunate that this Number of the Spectator did not end, as 
it might very well have done, with the former beautiful 
period." That is to say, "done it." And, then, we ask: 
done what? Not the act of ending ; because, in this 
case, there is no action at all. The Verb means to come 
to an end; to cease; not to go any further. This same 
Verb to end, is, sometimes, an active Verb: "I end my 
sentence ; " and then the Verb to do may supply its place; 
as, "I have not ended my sentence so well as I might 
have done; " that is, done it; that is, done, or performed, 
the act of ending. But the Number of the Spectator was 
no actor; it was expected to perform nothing ; it was, by 
the Doctor, wished to have ceased to proceed. " Did not 
end as it very well might have ended. . . ." This would 
have been correct ; but the Doctor wished to avoid the 
repetition, and thus he fell into bad grammar. "Mr. 
Speaker, I do not feel so well satisfied as I should have 
done, if the Bight Honorable gentleman had explained 
the matter more fully." You constantly hear talk like 
this amongst those whom the boroughs make law-givers- 
To feel satisfied is, when the satisfaction is to arise from 
conviction produced by fact or reasoning, a senseless ex- 
pression ; and to supply its place, when it is, as in this 
case, a neuter Verb, by to do, is as senseless. Done what 9 



As Relating to Verbs. 171 

Done the act of feeling ! "I do not feel so well satisfied 
as I should have done, or executed, or performed the act 
of feel in g I*" What incomprehensible words! Very be- 
coming in the creatures of corruption, but ridiculous in 
any other persons in the world. 

266. But do not misunderstand me. Do not confound 
do and did, as parts of a principal Verb, with the same 
words, as parts of an auxiliary. Read again Letter VIII, 
paragraph 111. Do and did, as helpers, are used with 
neuter as well as with active Verbs; for here it is not 
their business to supply the place of other Verbs, but 
merely to add strength to affirmations and negations, or 
to mark time; as, "The sentence does end; I do feel easy. 1 ' 
But done, which is the passive participle of the aclivo 
Verb to do, can never be used as an auxiliary. The want 
of making this distinction has led to the very common 
error of which I spoke in the last paragraph, and against 
which I am very desirous to guard you. 

267. In sentences which are negative or interrogative, 
do and did express time ; as, " You do not sleep ; did 
you not feel?' 1 But they do not here supply the place of 
other Verbs; they merely help; and their assistance is 
useful only as to the circumstance of time ; for we may 
say, " You sleep not ; felt you not V ' And if in answer to 
this question, I say, "I did? the word/eeZ is understood; 
"I did feel." 

You will sometimes hear even Wall-street millionaires say, "I 
done it; he seen him: he is dead broke;" which is confounding the 
past participle and the past tense. You must say, I did it, I saw 
him ; he is dead broken ; or, rather, completely ruined. But here 
is a very important matter; something which Cobbett does 
not touch ; something of prime importance. What is the differ- 
ence between " I did it" and " I have done it?" between " I was 
in New York" and "I have been in New York?" between "I 
wrote the letter " and " I have written the letter?" When do you 
use the one and when the other? Think for a moment. Give 
your own explanation before reading, mine. These two forms are 



172 Syntax, 

termed the past tense and the present perfect tense. Those who 
are 4 * native and to the manner born " seldom confound these 
tenses, but foreigners constantly do. The distinction between 
them, however, is exceedingly plain. We use the past tense when 
speaking of anything that has happened in a completely past time; 
as, I did it yesterday ; I was in New York last week ; I wrote a 
letter last Thursday. We use the present perfect tense when 
speaking of anything that has happened in a time not yet entirely 
past, or in an indefinite past time : I have done it to-day; I have 
been in New York this week ; I have written many letters ; I have 
been in Paris. Both the Germans and the French can, in their 
languages, use either form for the same time; so that they can 
say, which we cannot, "I have been in New York yesterday: I 
have written a letter last week." 

The past perfect, I had done, I had written, I had been, is used 
when speaking of something happening at a time farther back 
than or anterior to a given past time. For instance : While I am 
telling you of what happened to me in 1868 in London, and of my 
doing something there at that time, and of my writing a letter to 
somebody in that year, I suddenly inform you, for the better 
understanding of my narrative, that I had been in London before 
that year ; that I had done something there before that time, and 
that I had written to somebody before writing at that time. This, 
you see, is past perfect time ; it is going behind the past time of 
our narrative : and it is called the perfectly past time. 

268. Well, then, I think, that as far as relates to the 
active Verb, the passive Verb, and the passive participle, 
enough has now been said. You have seen, too, some- 
thing of the difference between the functions of the active 
Verb and those of the neuter; but there are a few remarks 
to be made with regard to the latter. A neuter Verb 
cannot have a noun or a pronoun in the objective case 
immediately after it; for though we say, "I dream a 
dream" it is understood that my mind has been engaged 
in a dream. " I live a good life? means that I am living 
in a good manner. " I walk my horse about," means that 
I lead or conduct my horse in the pace called a walk. 
Nor can a neuter Verb become passive; because a passive 
Verb is no other than a Verb describing an action received 



As Relating to Verbs. 173 

or endured. "The noble earl, on returning to town, 
found that the noble countess was eloped with his grace." 
I read this very sentence in an English newspaper not 
long ago. It should be had eloped; for was eloped means 
that somebody had eloped the countess; it means that she 
had received or endured, from some actor, the act of elop- 
ing, whereas, she is the actress, and the act is confined to 
herself. The Verb is called neuter because the action 
does not pass over to anything. There are Verbs which 
are inactive; such as, to sit, to sleep), to exist. These are 
also neuter Verbs, of course. But inactivity is not neces- 
sary to the making of a Verb neuter. It is sufficient for 
this purpose that the action do not pass from the actor to 
any object. 

These inactive verbs are the real neuter ones ; for, in the use of 
them, the nominative is neither acting nor acted on. But we now 
set down the whole batch, neuter and intransitive, as intransitive 
verbs; and Cobbett simply shows, by this verb to elope, that we 
cannot use an intransitive verb in the passive voice ; we can no 
more say I am eloped than we can say I am sitted, I am slept, or / 
am existed. There are a few intransitive verbs that seem an excep- 
tion to this rule ; but they are not. I mean the verbs to come, to 
arrive, to go, to return, to fall, to rise, and some others. Let me 
set them down in the two ways in which they are used : 

. He has come, He is come. 

He has arrived, He is arrived. 

He has gone. He is gone. 

He has returned. He is returned. 

He has fallen, He is fallen. 

He has risen, He is risen. 

In the second form, He is come, etc., the words come, amved, gone, 
returned, fallen, risen, are not really participles, but adjectives, 
indicating state; so this form is not at all a passive form of the 
verb; it is simply neuter; for the subject is neither acting nor 
acted on. In the first form, He has come, etc., these words are 
participles, and the sentences indicate action completed. But I 
find I am anticipating ; Cobbett says the same thing in the next 
paragraph but one. Just keep in mind that what he calls neuter 



174 Syntax, 

we now call intransitive; and that what he calls active, we now 
call transitive, 

269. In the instance just mentioned, the error is fla- 
grant: "was eloped,'' is what few persons would put 
down in writing; yet anybody might do it upon the au- 
thority of Dr. Johnson; for he says in his Dictionary 
that to elope is an active Verb, though he says that it is 
synonymous with to run away, which, in the same Dic- 
tionary, he says, is a neuter Verb. However, let those 
who prefer Doctor Johnson's authority to the dictates 
of reason and common sense say that " his grace eloped 
the countess; and that, accordingly, the countess was 
eloped." 

270. The danger of error, in cases of this kind, arises 
from the circumstance of there being many Verbs which 
are active in one sense and neuter in another. The Verb 
to endure, for instance, when it means to support, to sus- 
tain, is active; as, "I endure pain ." But when it means 
to last, to continue, it is neuter ; as, " The earth endures 
from age to age." In the first sense we can say, the pain 
is endured; but, in the last, we cannot say the earth is 
endured from age to age. We say, indeed, I am fallen; 
the colt is groicn, the trees are rotten, the stone is crum- 
bled, the post is moiddered, the pitcher is cracked; though 
to grow, to rot, to crumble, to moulder, to crack, are all 
of them neuter Verbs. But it is clearly understood here 
that we mean that the colt is in a grown, or augmented 
state; that the trees are in a rotten state; and so on; 
and it is equally clear that we could not mean that the 
countess was in an eloped state. " The noble earl found 
that the countess was gone!' This is correct, though 
to go is a neuter Verb. But gone, in this sense, is not 
the participle of the Verb to go; it is merely an adjective, 
meaning absent. If we put any word after it, which gives 
it a verbal signification, it becomes erroneous. " He found 
that the countess was gone out of the house." That is to 



As Relating to Verbs. 175 

say, was absent out of the house; and this is nonsense. 
It must, in this case be, "He found that the countess 
had gone out of the house." 

271. Much more might be said upon this part of my 
subject; many niceties might be stated and discussed; 
but I have said quite enough on it to answer every useful 
purpose. Here, as everywhere else, take time to think. 
There is a reason for the right use of every word. Have 
your meaning clear in your mind; know the meaning of 
all the words you employ ; and then you will seldom com- 
mit errors. 

272. There remains to be noticed the use of the active 
participle, and then we shall have a few, and only a few, 
words to say upon the subject of the modes of Verbs. 
As to the active participle, paragraph 97, in Letter VIII, 
will have told you nearly all that is necessary. We know 
well that I am working means that / work, and so on. 
There is great nicety in distinguishing the circumstances 
which call for the use of the one from those which call 
for the other : but, like many other things, though very 
difficult to explain by words, these circumstances are per- 
fectly well understood, and scrupulously attended to, by 
even the most illiterate persons. The active participle is, 
you know, sometimes a noun in its functions ; as, " Work- 
ing is good for our health." Here it is the nominative 
case to the Verb is. Sometimes it is an adjective; as, 
"the working people.'.' As a noun it may be in any of 
the three cases ; as, " Working is good ; the advantage of 
-working; I like working? It may be in the singular or 
in the plural : " The working of the mines ; the workings 
of corruption." Of course it requires articles and prepo- 
sitions as nouns require them. More need not be said 
about it ; and, indeed, my chief purpose in mentioning the 
active participle in this place is to remind you that it may 
be a nominative case in a sentence. 

273. The modes have been explained in Letter VIII, 



176 Sy?itax, 

paragraphs 92, 93, 94, 95, and 96. Read those paragraphs 
again. The infinitive mode has, in almost all respects, 
the power of a noun. u To icork is good for our health." 
Here it is the nominative of the sentence. * ; To eat, to 
drink, and to sleep, are necessary.'' It cannot become a 
plural; but it may be, and frequently is, in the objective 
case; as, "I want to eat." The to is, in some few cases, 
omitted when the infinitive is in the objective case; as, 
"I dare write" But, "I dare to write," is just as neat, 
and more proper. The to is omitted by the use of the 
ellipsis; as, "I like to shoot, hunt, and course." But 
care must be taken not to leave out the to. if you thereby 
make the meaning doubtful. Repetition is sometimes 
disagreeable, and tends to enfeeble language ; but it is 
always preferable to obscurity. 

Here is a little difficulty. Cobbett has repeatedly said that the 
nominative always follows the verb to be; and so it does ; but it is 
not always so with the infinitive of this verb. Look at these two 
sentences : 

I supposed it to be him. 

I am supposed to be he. 
In the first instance, the grammarians say that we must say to be 
Mm, because it follows a word in the objective case (it), and is the 
complement of that word; and in the second case we must say 
to be he, because it follows a word in the nominative case (I), and 
is the complement of that word. Observe that in the second 
example it is as if I said, " I am supposed to be existing ; n and in 
the first, as if I said, " I supposed something." 

274. If you cast your eye once more on the conjugation 
of the Verb to work, in Letter VJLUL, you will see that I 
have there set down the three other modes with all their 
persons, numbers, and times. The imperative mode I 
despatched very quietly by a single short paragraph ; and. 
indeed, in treating of the other two modes, the indicative 
and the subjunctive, there is nothing to do but to point 
out the trifling variations that our Verbs undergo in order 
to make them suit their forms to the differences of mode. 



As Relating to Verbs. 177 

The indicative mode is that manner of using the Verb 
which is applied when we are speaking of an action with- 
out any other action being at all connected with it, so as 
to make the one a condition or consequence of the other. 
" He works every day ; he rides out ; " and so on. But, 
there may be a condition or a consequence dependent on 
this working and riding; and in that case these Verbs 
must be in the subjunctive mode ; because the action they 
express depends on something else, going before or coming 
after. "If he work every day, he shall be paid every day; 
if he ride out, he will not be at home by supper tirae/' 
The s is dropped at the end of the Verbs here; and the 
true cause is this, that there is a sign understood. If 
filled up, the sentence would stand thus: "If he should 
work; if he should ride out.' 1 So that, after all, the Verb 
has, in reality, no change of termination to denote what is 
called mode. And a:l the fuss which grammarians have 
made about the potential modes, and other fanciful dis- 
tinctions of the kind, only serve to puzzle and perplex the 
learner. 

275. Verbs in general, and, indeed, all the Verbs, except 
the Verb to be, have always the same form in the pjresent 
time of the indicative and in that of the subjunctive, in 
all the persons, save the second and third person singular. 
Thus, we say, in the present of the indicative, I work, 
we icork, you icork, they work; and in the subjunctive the 
same. But we say, in the former, thou workest, he works; 
while, in the subjunctive, we say, thou icork, he work; 
that is to say, thou mayst icork, or might st, or shouldst 
(and so on), work ; and he may work, or might or should, 
as the sense may require. Therefore, as to all Verbs, 
except the Verb to be, it is only in these two persons that 
any thing can happen to render any distinction of mode 
necessary. But the Verb to be has more variation than 
any other Verb. All other Verbs have the same form in 
their indicative present time as in their infinitive mode, 
8* 



178 Syntax, 

with the trifling exception of the st and s added to the 
second and third person singular; as, to have, to write, to 
work, to run; I have, I write, I work, I run. But the 
Verb to be becomes, in the present time of its indicative, 
I am, thou art, he is, we are, you ore, they are; which 
are great changes. Therefore, as the subjunctive, in all 
its persons, takes the iniinitive of the Verb without any 
change at all, the Verb to be exhibits the use of this mode 
most clearly ; for, instead of I dm, thou art, he is, we are, 
the subjunctive requires, I be, thou be, he be, we be; that 
is to say, I may be, or might be; and so on. Look now 
at the conjugation of the Verb to be, in Letter Vm, 
paragraph 117: and then come back to me. 

276. You see, then, that this important Verb, to be, has 
a form in some of its persons appropriated to the sub- 
junctive mode. This is a matter of consequence. Dis- 
tinctions, without differences in the things distinguished, 
are fanciful, and, at best, useless. Here is a real difference j 
a practical difference ; a difference in the form of the word. 
Here is & past time of the subjunctive; a past time distin- 
guished, in some of its persons, by a different manner of 
spelling or writing the word. If I be; if I were; if he 
were; and not if I was, if he was. In the case of other 
Verbs, the past of the indicative is the same as the past of 
the subjunctive: that is to say, the Verb is written in the 
same letters ; but in the case of the Verb to be it is other- 
wise. If I worked, if I smote, if I had. Here the Verbs 
are the same as in I worked, I smote. I had; but in the 
case of the Verb to be. we must say, in the past of the 
indicative, I was, and in that of the subjunctive, if I were. 

277. The question, then, is this: What are the cases in 
which we ought to use the subjunctive form? Bishop 
Lowth, and, on his authority, Mr. Lindley Murray, have 
said, that some conjunctions have a government of verbs; 
that is to say, make them or force them to be in the sub- 
junctive mode. And then these gentlemen mention par- 



As Relating to Verbs. 179 

ticularly the conjunctions, if, though, unless, and some 
others. But (and these gentlemen allow it), the Verbs 
which follow these conjunctions are not always in the 
subjunctive mode; and the using of that mode must 
depend, not upon the conjunction, but upon the sense of 
the whole sentence. How, then, can the conjunction 
govern the Verb? It is the sense, the meaning of the 
whole sentence, which must govern ; and of this you will 
presently see clear proof. "If it be dark, do not come 
home. Treating is necessary to man, he ought not to be 
a glutton. 1 ' In the first of these sentences, the matter 
expressed by the Verb may be or may not be. There 
exists an uncertainty on the subject. And if the sentence 
were filled up, it would staad thus: "If it should be dark, 
do not come home." But in the second sentence there 
exists no such uncertainty. We know, and all the world 
knows, that eating is necessary to man. We jould not 
fill up the sentence with should; and, therefore, we make 
use of is. Thus, then, the conjunction if, which you see 
is employed in both cases, has nothing at all to do with 
the government of the verb. It is the sense which 
governs. 

It is worth while, however, to notice the conjunctions that are 
said to govern the subjunctive : though, although, unless, lest, until, 
till, whether, provided that, on condition that, — because, when used, 
they generally indicate some uncertainty. When they do not do 
this, then the indicative must be used. Here is an example that 
will illustrate this. If I were speaking of the possibilities in the 
future career of a young man, I should naturally say: "Unless 
he be honest, he will never, though he be rich as Croesus, be happy." 
But if I were speaking of a real person, who is actually rich as 
Crcesus, I should naturally say, "Though he is rich as Croesus, he is 
not happy." Again: "Do not admit him, unless he has a ticket." 
Here we say has, because we anticipate something as fact. But, 
where there is a doubt, we use the subjunctive. * ' Do not give him 
the money, unless he return you the goods." When, therefore, 
acything is spoken of as actual fact, or as in absolute existence, the 
indicative is used. Those who have studied French will remember 



180 Syntax, 

that the French have also a number of words that govern the sub- 
junctive, and in many, if not most, of the cases where they use the 
subjunctive, we do so too. Though he be a giant; unless he be 
attentive ; lest he hurt you ; provided that he pay you ; on condi- 
tion that he reward you ; wait until he come. The French use the 
subjunctive in all these cases. They also use it after certain verbs, 
as we do too; as, ''Be sure that he lay no hand on you; mind 
that he do not touch you." You have doubtless noticed this use of 
the subjunctive in such sentences as that of Cobbett himself in 
paragraph 250 : ' ' You must take care that there be a nominative, 
and that it be clearly expressed or understood." Some writers 
think that the subjunctive mode is fast passing out of use, and 
that it will soon be altogether obsolete. I can only say that if it 
do go out of use, we shall lose the means of indicating different 
shades of meaning in the words we use. I suppose one reason 
why it is going out of use is because the great army of newspaper- 
writers know nothing of it ; they are obliged to write with such 
extraordinary rapidity and in such haste that they can't take time 
to consider fine shades or differences of meaning in the words they 
employ. — Notice that the difference between the indicative and the 
subjunctive, in all verbs except the verb to be, is simply this, that 
in the subjunctive the endings are all cut off. Cast your eye 
over the conjugations of to work and to be icorked. 

278. There is a great necessity for care as to this 
matter; for the meaning of what we write is very much 
affected when we make use of the modes indiscriminately. 
Let us take an instance. " Though her chastity be right 
and becoming, it gives her no claim to praise ; because she 
would be criminal if she icere not chaste."" Now, by em- 
ploying the subjunctive, in the first member of the sen- 
tence, we leave it uncertain whether it be right or not for 
her to be chaste ; and by employing it in the second, we 
express a doubt as to the fact of her chastity. We mean 
neither of these ; and, therefore, notwithstanding here are 
a though and an if, both the Verbs ought to be in the 
indicative. " Though her chastity is right and becoming, 
it gives her no claim to praise; because she would be 
criminal if she teas not chaste. 1 ' Fill up with the signs. 
" Though her chastity may be right ; if she should not be 



As Relating to Verbs. 181 

chaste ; " and then you see, at once, what a difference there 
is in the meaning. 

279. The subjunctive is necessarily always used where 
a sign is left out; as, " Take care that he come to-morrow, 
that you be ready to receive him, that he be well received, 
and that all things be duly prepared for his entertain- 
ment." Fill up with the signs, and you will see the reason 
for what you write. 

280. The Verb to be is sometimes used thus : " Were he 
rich, I should not like him the better. Were it not dark, 
I would go." That is to say, if he were; if it were. "It 
tcere a jest, indeed, to consider a set of seat-sellers and 
seat-buyers as a lawful legislative body. It were to violate 
every principle of morality to consider honesty as a virtue, 
when not to be honest is a crime which the law punishes." 
The it stands for a great deal here. "Ridiculous, indeed, 
would the state of our minds be, if it were such as to 
exhibit a set of seat-sellers and seat-buyers as a lawful 
legislative body." I mention these instances because they 
appear unaccountable; and I never like to slur things 
over. Those expressions for the using of which we cannot 
give a reason ought not to be used at all. 

There is another use of the verb to be, unnoticed by Cobbett, 
which may be spoken of here. It has long been a matter of con- 
troversy whether we should say, ''the bridge is building," or "the 
bridge is being built;" "preparations are making," or "prepara- 
tions are being made." Mr. White maintains that the former is 
the only proper form, and that the latter form is contrary to the 
genius of our language. And other critics are of the same opinion. 
Well, there is no use in talking of it now; it is too late to alter it; 
for this manner of speaking is now used by almost everybody that 
speaks or writes English. Every newspaper in the United States 
uses this form; and the truth is, it has become a necessity, for 
there are some cases in which no other form can be used without 
changing the meaning of the sentence. We can say, The house is 
building, the book is printing, the play is acting, the bread is 
baking, the clothes are making, and so on, in many other instances; 
but we cannot say, "The boy is whipping" or "The girl is 



182 Syntax, 

ruining" to signify that "The boy is being whipped" or "The 
girl is being ruined." No ; it is no use trying to change this now ; 
there are certain cases where we must use "is being;" it is in the 
very life-blood of the language ; it is every-day English ; and there 
is no taking it out. It is like the word execute, which originally 
meant, and still properly means, to put a sentence into force ; but 
now it is used every day, in print and in conversation, to signify 
putting a person to death. And there is no doubt but it will con- 
tinue to be so used to the end of time ; for no dictum of the critics 
can change it. 

It is worth while remarking, that in sentences like " The house 
is building," "the corn is thrashing," the words building and 
thrashing are not verbs, but nouns; for the original form was "in 
building, " * ' in thrashing. " The Germans have an entirely different 
verb for such expressions; for "The house is building" they say 
Das Haus wird gebaut, and not Das Haus ist gebaut, which latter 
means The house is built. 

281. As to instances in which authors have violated the 
principles of grammar, with respect to the use of the 
modes, I could easily fill a book much larger than this 
with instances of this kind from Judge Blackstone and 
Doctor Johnson. One only shall suffice. I take it from 
the Judge's first Book. " Therefore, if the king purchases 
lands of the nature of gavel-kind, where all the sons inherit 
equally; yet, upon the king's demise, his eldest son shall 
succeed to these lands alone." Here is fine confusion, 
not to say something inclining towards high treason ; for, 
if the king's son be to inherit these lands alone, he, of 
course, is not to inherit the crown. But it is the Vei-b 
purchases with which we have to do at present. Now, it 
is notorious that the king does not purchase lands in 
gavel-kind, or any other lands ; whereas, from the form of 
the Verb, it is taken for granted that he does it. It should 
have been, "If the king purchase lands;" that is to say, 
if he were to purchase, or if he shoidd purchase. 

282. Thus, my dear James, have I gone through all 
that appeared to me of importance relating to Verbs. 
Every part of the Letter ought to be carefully read, and 



As Relating to Verbs. 183 

its meaning ought to be well weighed in your mind ; but 
always recollect that, in the using of Verbs, that which 
requires your first and most earnest care is the ascertain- 
ing of the nominative of the sentence ; for, out of every 
hundred grammatical errors, full fifty, I believe, are com- 
mitted for want of due attention to this matter. 

Let me say a word here which will make clear to you what the 
Germans mean by what they call genetic teaching ; that is, unfold- 
ing a subject in such a way as to show how it originates and grows 
up to completion. The shortest possible sentence must have a sub- 
ject and a predicate (nominative and verb) ; for although the one 
word, "Love!" is a sentence, the subject is understood: "Love 
thou ! " The next step is the object : 4 * Love thou me ! " A sentence 
may, therefore, consist of merely subject and predicate, or of sub- 
ject, predicate, and object. 

The last is an imperative sentence ; let us take a declarative one. 
"Men love. n This is a sentence ; it contains subject and predicate, 
and makes complete sense. "Men love women." This has sub- 
ject, predicate, and object. Now we may go on adding words, 
phrases, and clauses, modifying each of these chief parts of the 
sentence, until we stretch it out into a compound or complex sen- 
tence. For a sentence, like a house, is just built up by successive 
additions. These additions are often called adjuncts ; they consist 
of single words, of phrases and clauses. I shall add all I can to the 
separate words of this sentence; first modifying the subject by 
various single words, then by a phrase, then by a clause ; and then 
I shall endeavor to do the same to the predicate and the object. 
Now observe, and you will see how a sentence grows : 

Men love women. 

The men love women. 

The worthy men love women. 

The very worthy men love women. 

The very worthy men in this city love women. 

The very worthy men in this city, who are noted for their excellent char- 
acter, love women. 

Here we have modified the subject, first by the definite article, 
then by an adjective, then we have modified the adjective by an 
adverb ; then we have modified or limited the subject by a phrase, 
and finally by a clause. Now let ust try and do the same thing to 
the predicate and the object : 



184 Syntax, as Relating to Adverbs, 

Men love women. 

Men love the women. 

Men love the good women. 

Men love the very good women. 

Men love dearly the very good women. 

Men love dearly the very good women of this city. 

Men love dearly the very good women of this city, who are respected by 

all the world. 

The whole sentence will therefore be i " The very worthy men in 
this city, who are noted for their excellent character, love dearly 
the very good women of this city, who are respected by all the 
world." This, therefore, has now become a complex sentence, 
of which the chief clause is, "Men love women," and all the rest 
modifies the subject, the predicate, and the object of this clause. 
Of course, it might be extended much farther ; but this will do to 
show you how a sentence grows; or, if you please, how it is 
built up. Should you ever be requested to give a trial lesson in 
English grammar, in a class of scholars who have learned some- 
thing of the subject, you cannot do better than show them, in 
this manner, how a sentence is formed. 



LETTER XX. 

SYNTAX, AS RELATING TO ADVERBS, PREPOSITIONS, AND CON- 
JUNCTIONS. 

283. After what has been said, my dear James, on the 
subject of the Verb, there remains little to be added. The 
Adverbs, Prepositions, and Conjunctions, are all words 
which never vary their endings. Their uses have been 
sufficiently illustrated in the Letters on the Syntax of 
Nouns, Pronouns, and Verbs. In a Letter, which is yet to 
come, and which will contain specimens of false grammar, 
the misuse of many words, belonging to these inferior 
Parts of Speech, will be noticed ; but it would be a waste 
of your time to detain you by an elaborate account of 
that which it is, by this time, hardly possible for you not 
to understand. 

284. Some grammarians have given lists of Adverbs, 



Prepositions, and Conjunctions. 185 

Prepositions, and Conjunctions. For what reason I know 
not, seeing that they have not attempted to give lists of 
the words of other parts of speech. These lists must be 
defective, and, therefore, worse than no lists. To find out 
the meaning of single words, the Dictionary is the place. 
The business of grammar is to show the connection be- 
tween words, and the manner of using .words properly. 
The sole cause of this dwelling upon these parts of speech 
appears to me to have been a notion that they would seem 
to be neglected, unless a certain number of pages of the 
book were allotted to each. To be sure each of them is a 
part of speech, as completely as the little finger is a part" 
of the body ; but few persons will think that, because we 
descant very frequently, and at great length, upon the 
qualities of the head and heart, we ought to do the same 
with regard to the qualities of the little finger. 

285. I omitted, in the Letter on Verbs, to notice the 
use of the word thing; and I am not sorry that I did, be- 
cause by my noticing it in this concluding paragraph, the 
matter may make a deeper impression on your mind. 
Thing is, of course, a noun. A pen is a thing, and every 
animal, or creature, animate or inanimate, is a thing. We 
apply it to the representing of every creature in the uni- 
verse, except to men, women, and children ; and a creature 
is that which has been created, be it living, like a horse, 
or dead, like dirt or stones. The use of the word thing, 
as far as this goes, is plainly reconcilable to reason ; but 
"to get drunk is a beastly thing." Here is neither human 
being, irrational animal, nor inanimate creature. Here is 
merely an action. Well, then, this action is the thing; 
for, as you have seen in Letter XIX, paragraph 273, a 
verb in the infinitive mode has, in almost all respects, the 
functions and powers of a noun. "It was a most atrocious 
thing to uphold the Bank of England in refusing to give 
gold for its promissory notes, and to compel the nation to 
submit to the wrong that it sustained from that refusal." 



186 Syntax. 

The meaning is, that the whole of these measures or trans- 
actions constituted a most atrocious deed or thing. 

Cobbett despatches the syntax of adverbs in half-a-dozen lines ; 
and yet there is one little matter connected with the use of these 
words that has, perhaps, caused more uncertainty, perplexing 
uncertainty, than anything connected with grammar. We say, 
rightly, that he fights bravely and she sings finely ; but shall I say 
that he looks bravely and that her voice sounds finely ? I may say 
that he dances smoothly and that she plays sweetly; but shall 
I say that his coat feels smoothly and that she looks sweetly? If 
not, how am I to know when to use the adverb and when the 
adjective? 

This, as I have said, is a matter which has puzzled many a stu- 
dent of grammar, and caused anxiety to many a young writer. Here 
is a rule which I have never seen in any grammar, but which, I think, 
will cover the majority of such cases, and is easily understood 
and remembered : After all the verbs referring to the five senses, 
the adjective, and not the adverb, is to be used: as, It tastes good; 
it smells nice; it sounds harsh; it feels smooth; it looks handsome. 
Expressed in a larger and more comprehensive manner, the rula 
might stand thus : Wherever manner is to be expressed, use the 
adverb; wherever quality is to be expressed, use the adjective. 
Cobbett repeatedly uses the expression ''talks fine;'" meaning, of 
course, fine talk, and not the manner of speaking. In the same 
way, we must say, " I arrived here safe and sound," and not safely 
and soundly; for it is not the manner of arriving, but the state in 
which he arrived, that is meant. 

I thought that Cobbett explained somewhere in this grammar 
the diference between so and such; but I cannot find it. Mr. 
Swinton says : "So has sometimes a pronominal use ; as, ' Whether 
he is a genins or not, he is considered so' — ( a genius)." I think 
this is an error; so is used adjectively and adverbially, not pro- 
nominally ; such is used pronominally ; as, Whether he be a genius 
or not, he is considered such; whether he be rich or not, he is 
considered so. (See paragraph 143.) 

By the way, I ought to have stated in another place that it is 
correct to say, "Two and two wfour; five times five is twenty- 
five;" for these are abstract numbers, and are looked upon as 
one sum. But if you make the numbers cmcrete or denominate, 
then you must use the verb in the plural; as, "Two horses and 
two horses are four horses , five times five horses are twenty-five 
horses." 



Specimens of False Grammar. 187 



LETTEE XXI. 

specimens of false grammar, taken from the writings of 
doctor johnson, and from those of doctor watts. 

My dear James : 

The chief object of this Letter is to prove to you the 
necessity of using great care and caution in the construc- 
tion of your sentences. When you see writers like Dr. 
Johnson and Dr. Watts committing grammatical errors, 
and, in some instances, making their words amount to 
nonsense, or at least making their meaning doubtful ; when 
you see this in the author of a grammar and of a dictionary 
of the English language, and in the author of a work on 
the subject of logic; and when you are informed that 
these were two of the most learned men that England 
ever produced, you cannot fail to be convinced that con- 
stant care and caution are necessary to prevent you from 
committing not only similar, but much greater, errors. 

Another object, in the producing of these specimens, is 
to convince you that a knowledge of the Latin and Greek 
languages does not prevent men from writing bad English. 
Those languages are, by impostors and their dupes, called 
"the learned languages;" and those who have paid for 
having studied them are said to have received " a liberal 
education." These appellations are false, and, of course, 
they lead to false conclusions. Learning, as a noun, 
means knowledge, and learned means knowing, or pos- 
sessed of knowledge. Learning is, then, to be acquired 
by conception; and, it is shown in. judgment, in reasoning, 
and in the various modes of employing it. What, then, 
can learning have to do with any particular tongue! 
Good grammar, for instance, written in Welsh, or in the 
language of the Chippewa savages, is more learned than 
bad grammar written in Greek. The learning is in the 



188 Specimens of False Grammar. 

mind and not in the tongue; learning consists of ideas 
and not of the noise that is made by the mouth. If, for 
instance, the Reports drawn up by the House of Commons, 
and which are compositions discovering in every sentence 
ignorance the most profound, were written in Latin, 
should we then call them learned? Should we say that 
the mere change of the words from one tongue into 
another made that learned which was before unlearned? 
As well may we say that a falsehood written in English 
would have been truth if written in Latin ; and as well 
may we say that a certain handwriting is a learned hand- 
writing, or, that certain sorts of ink and paper are learned 
ink and paper, as that a language, or tongue, is a learned 
language or tongue. 

The cause of the use of this false appellation, " learned 
languages," is this, that those who teach them in England 
have, in consequence of their teaching, very large estates 
in house and land, which are public property, but which 
are now used for the sole benefit of those teachers, who 
are, in general, the relations or dependents of the aristoc- 
racy. In order to give a color of reasonableness to this 
species of appropriation, the languages taught by the 
possessors are called " the learned languages ;" and which 
appellation is, at the same time, intended to cause the 
mass of the people to believe that the professors and 
learners of these languages are, in point of wisdom, far 
superior to other men ; and to establish the opinion that 
all but themselves are unlearned persons. In short, the 
appellation, like many others, is a trick which fraud has 
furnished for the purpose of guarding the snug possessors 
of the property against the consequences of the people's 
understanding the matter. 

It is curions enough that this appellation of " learned 
languages" is confined to the English nation and the 
American, which inherits it from the English. Neither 
in France, in Spain, in Italy, nor in Germany, is this false 



Specimens of False Grammar. 189 

and absurd appellation in use. The same motives have 
not existed in those countries. There the monks and 
other priests have inherited from the founders. They 
had not any occasion to resort to this species of imposition. 
But in England the thing required to be glossed over. 
There was something or other required in that country 
as an apology for taking many millions a year from the 
public to keep men to do no apparently useful thing. 

Seeing themselves unable to maintain the position that 
the Latin and Greek are more "learned languages" than 
others, the impostors and their dupes tell us that this is 
not what they mean. They mean, they say, not that those 
languages are, in themselves, more learned than others: 
but that, to possess a knowledge of them is a proof that 
the possessor is a learned man. To be sure, they do not 
offer us any argument in support of this assertion ; while 
it would be easy to show that the assertion must, in every 
case, be false. But let it suffice, for this time, that we 
show that the possession of the knowledge of those lan- 
guages does not prevent men from committing numerous 
grammatical errors when they write in their native lan- 
guage. 

I have, for this purpose, fixed upon the writings of 
Doctor Johnson and of Doctor Watts ; because, besides 
its being well known that they were deeply skilled in 
Latin and Greek, it would be difficult to find two men 
with more real learning. I take also the two works for 
which they are respectively the most celebrated; the 
Rambler of Doctor Johnson, and the Logic of Doctor 
Watts. These are works of very great learning. The 
Rambler, though its general tendency is to spread a 
gloom over life, and to damp all enterprise, private as 
well as public, displays a vast fund of knowledge in the 
science of morals; and the Logic, though the religious 
zeal of its pious, sincere, and benevolent author has led 
him into the very great error of taking his examples of 



190 Specimens of False Grammar. 

self-evident propositions from amongst those, many of 
which great numbers of men think not to be self-evident, 
is a work wherein profound learning is conveyed in a 
style the most simple, and in a manner the most pleasing. 
It is impossible to believe that the Logic was not revised 
with great care ; and, as to the Eambler, the biographer 
of its author tells us that the Doctor made six thousand 
corrections and alterations before the work was printed 
in volumes. 

The Eambleb is in Numbers; therefore, at the end of 
each extract from it, I shall put the letter E, and the 
Number. The Logic is divided into Parts and Chapters. 
At the end of each extract from it, I shall put L ; and 
then add the Part and Chapter. I shall range the ex- 
tracts under the names of the parts of speech to which 
the erroneous words respectively belong. 

AETICLES. 

" I invited her to spend the day in viewing a seat and 
gardens.'' — E. No. 34 

"For all our speculative acquaintance with things 
should be made subservient to our better conduct in the 
civil and religious life.'' — L. Introduction. 

The indefinite article a cannot, you kown, be put before 
a plural noun. We cannot say a gardens; but this is, in 
fact, said in the above extract. It should have been " a 
seat and its gardens." "Civil and religious life" in the 
second extract are general and indefinite. The article, 
therefore, was unnecessary, and is improperly used. Look 
back at the use of Articles, Letter IV. 

NOUNS. 

"Among the innumerable historical authors, who fill 
every nation with accounts of their ancestors, or under- 
take to transmit to futurity the events of their own time, 



Specimens of False Grammar. 191 

the greater part, when fashion and novelty have ceased to 
recommend them, are of no other use than chronological 
memorials, which necessity may sometimes require to be 
consulted/'— R. No. 122. 

This is all confusion. Whose ancestors? The nation s 
ancestors are meant ; but the author s are expressed. The 
two theirs and the them clearly apply to the same Noun. 
How easily all this confusion would have been avoided 
by considering the nation as a singular, and saying its 
ancestors! In the latter part of the sentence, the authors 
are called chronological memorials; and though we may, 
in some cases, use the word author for author s work; 
yet, in a case like this, where we are speaking of the 
authors as actors, we cannot take such a liberty. 

" Each of these classes of the human race has desires, 
fears, and conversation peculiar to itself; cares which 
another cannot feel, and pleasures which he cannot par- 
take."— R. No. 160. 

The noun of multitude, classes, being preceded by each, 
has the pronoun itself properly put after it ; but the he 
does not correspond with these. It should have been it. 
With regard to these two extracts, see paragraph 181. 

" His great ambition was to shoot flying, and he, there- 
fore, spent whole days in the woods, pursuing game, 
which, before he was near enough to see them, his ap- 
proach flighted away." — R. No. 66. 

Game is not a noun of multitude, like mob, or Souse 
of Commons. There are different games or pastimes; 
but this word, as applied to the describing of wild ani- 
mals, has no plural ; and, therefore, cannot have a plural 
pronoun to stand for it. 

"The obvious duties of piety towards God and love 
towards man, with the governments of all our inclinations 
and passions." — L. Part 4. 

This plural is so clearly wrong that I need not show 
why it is wrong. 



194 Specimens of False Q-rammar. 

easily conceive. Their arts have no great variety, they 
think nothing worth their care but money." — R. No. 35. 

" Their arts ;" but whose arts? There is no antecedent, 
except " rural politics /" and thus, all this last sentence is 
perfect nonsense. 

" But the fear of not being approved as just copiers of 
human manners is not the most important concern that 
an author of this sort ought to have before him. 11 — R. 
No. 4. 

An author cannot be said to fear not to be approved 
as just copiers. The word author ought to have been in 
the plural, and him ought to have been them. 

" The wit, whose vivacity condemns slower tongues to 
silence; the scholar, whose knowledge allows no man to 
think he instructs him? — R. No. 188. 

Which of the hco is allowed 1 ? The scholar or the no 
man ? Which of the two does he relate to ? Which of 
the two does the him relate to ? By a little reflection we 
may come at the Doctor's meaning ; but if we may stop 
to discover the grammatical meaning of an author's 
words, how are we to imbibe the science which he would 
teach us ? 

" The state of the possessor of humble virtues, to the 
affector of great excellencies, is that of a small cottage of 
stone, to the palace raised with ice by the Empress of 
Russia; it was, for a time, splendid and luminous, but 
the first sunshine melted it to nothing." — R. No. 22. 

Which, instead of it, would have made clear that which 
is now dubious, for it may relate to cottage as well as to 
palace ; or it may relate to state. 

We do not now say excellencies, but excellences, for the singular is 
excellence. Excellencies is the plural of excellency, which is now sel- 
dom used except as a tUle of honor. It is the same kind of error 
as Castlereagh's indulgencies, which you will see by-and-by. 

" The love of retirement has, in all ages, adhered closely 
to those minds which have been most enlarged by knowl- 



Specimens of False Grammar. 195 

edge, or elevated by genius. Those who enjoyed every- 
thing generally supposed to confer happiness, have been 
forced to seek it in the shades of privacy.*' — R. No. 7. 

To seek what? The love of retirement, or everything? 
The Doctor means happiness, but his words do not mean it. 

"Those who enjoyed' 1 ought to be "Those who have enjoyed;" 
because no particular time is mentioned. (See paragraph 261.) 

" Yet there is a certain race of men that make it their 
duty to hinder the reception of every work of learning or 
genius, who stand as sentinels in the avenues of fame, 
and value themselves upon giving ignorance and envy the 
first notice of a prey." — R. No. 3. 

That, or tvho, may, as we have seen, be the relative of 
a noun, which is the name of a rational being or beings ; 
but both cannot be used, applicable to the same noun in 
the same sentence. Nor is "a prey" proper. Prey has 
no plural. It is like fat, meat, grease, garbage, and many 
other words of that description. 

" For, among all the animals upon which nature has 
impressed deformity and horror, there was none whom 
he durst not encounter rather than a beetle." — R. No. 126. 

Here are whom and which used as the relatives to the 
same <<noun; and, besides, we know that ichom can, in no 
case, be a relative to irrational creatures, and, in this case, 
the author is speaking of such creatures only. "Horror" 
is not a thing that can be impressed upon another thing 
so as to be seen. . Horror is a feeling of the mind; for, 
though we say "horror was visible on his countenance," 
we clearly mean that the outward signs of horror were 
visible. We cannot see horror as we can deformity. It 
should have been "deformity and hideousness." 

" To cull from the mass of mankind those individuals 
upon -which the attention ought to be most employed. 1 ' — 
R. No. 4. 

The antecedent belongs to rational beings, and, there- 
fore, the which should have been whom. 



196 Specimens of False Grammar. 

" This determination led me to Metissa, the daughter 
of Chrisophilus, whose person was at least without de- 
formity."— E. No. 35. 

The person of which of the two? Not of the old papa, 
to be sure ; and yet this is what the words mean. 

" To persuade them who are entering the world, that 
all are equally vicious, is not to awaken judgment." — R. 
No. 119. 

Those persons who are entering the world, and not 
any particular persons of whom we have already been 
speaking. We cannot say them persons; and, therefore, 
this sentence is incorrect. 

" Of these pretenders, it is fit to distinguish those who 
endeavor to deceive from them who are deceived." — R. 
No. 189. 

" I have, therefore, given a place to what may not be 
useless to them whose chief ambition is to please." — R. 
No. 34. 

The thems in these two sentences should be those. 
But "them who are deceived" has another sort of error 
attached to it, for the who, remember, is not, of itself, a 
nominative. The antecedent, as you have seen, must be 
taken into view. This antecedent, must be the persons, 
understood; and then we have them persons are deceived. 

" Reason, as to the power and principles of it, is the 
common gift of God to man." — L. Introduction. 

The it may relate to power as well as to reason. There- 
fore, it would have been better to say, " Reason, as to its 
power and principles ;" for if clearness is always neces- 
sary, how necessary must it be in the teaching of logic ! 

"All the prudence that any man exerts in his common 
concerns of life." — L. Introduction. 

Any man means, here, the same as men in general, and 
the concerns mean the concerns common to men in gen- 
eral ; and therefore the article the should have been used 
instead of the pronoun his. 



Specimens of False Grammar. 197 

" It gives pain to the mind and memory, and exposes 
the unskillful hearer to mingle the superior and inferior 
particulars together ; it leads them into a thick wood in- 
stead of open daylight, and places them in a labyrinth 
instead of a plain path/' — L. Part 4, Chap 2. 

The grammar is clearly bad ; and the rhetoric is not 
quite free from fault. Labyrinth is the opposite of plain 
path, but open daylight is not the opposite of a thick 
wood. Open plain would have been better than open 
daylight/ for open daylight may exist along with a thick 
wood. 

VEKBS. 

" There are many things which we every day see others 
unable to perform, and, perhaps, have even miscarried 
ourselves in attempting ; and yet can hardly allow to be 
difficult."— E. No. 122. 

This sentence has in it one of the greatest of faults. 
The nominative case of can allow is not clear to us. 
This is a manner too elliptical. " We can hardly allow 
them" is what was meant. 

"A man's eagerness to do that good, to ichich he is not 
called, will betray him into crimes." — E. No. 8. 

The man is not called to the good, but to do the good. 
It is not my business, at this time, to criticise the opinions 
of Doctor Johnson; but I cannot refrain from just re- 
marking upon this sentence, that it contains the sum 
total of passive obedience and non-resistance. It con- 
demns all disinterested zeal and everything worthy of the 
name of patriotism. 

" We are not compelled to toil through half a folio to 
be convinced that the author has broke his promise." — E. 
No. 1. 

"The Muses, when they sung before the throne of 
Jupiter."— E. No. 3. 

In the first of these, the past time is used where the 



198 Specimens of False Grammar. 

passive participle ought to have been used ; and in the 
second, the passive participle is used in the place of the 
past time, broken and sang were the proper words. 

" My purpose was, after ten months more spent in com- 
merce, to have withdrawn my wealth to a safer country." 
— E. No. 120. 

The purpose was present, and therefore it was his pur- 
pose to withdraw his wealth. 

" A man may, by great attention, persuade others that 
he really has the qualities that he presumes to boast ; but 
the hour will come when he shoidd exert them, and then 
whatever he enjoyed vol praise, he must suffer in reproach/ 
— E. No. 20. 

Here is a complete confounding of times. Instead of 
should, it should be ought to; and instead of enjoyed, it 
should be may have enjoyed. The sense is bad, too ; for 
how can a man suffer in reproach what he has enjoyed in 
praise f 

"He had taught himself to think riches more valua- 
ble than nature designed them, and to expect from them 
"— K. No. 20. 

"I could prudently adventure an inseparable union." — 
E. No. 119. 

"I propose to endeavor the entertainme?it of my coun- 
trymen." — E. No. 1. 

" He may, by attending the remarks, which every paper 
will produce. 1 ' — E. No. 1. 

In each of these four sentences, a neuter verb has the 
powers of an active [transitive] verb given to it. De- 
signed them to be; adventure on; endeavor to entertain; 
attending to." To design a thing is to draw it; to 
attend a thing is to wait on it. No case occurs to me, 
at present, wherein adventure and endeavor can be active 
[transitive] verbs; but, at any rate, they ought not to 
have assumed the active office here. 

"I was not condemned in my youth to solitude, either 



Specimens of False Grammar'. 199 

by indigence or deformity, nor passed the earlier part of 
life without the flattery of courtship." — R No. 119. 

The verb cannot change from a neuter to an active 
without a repetition of the nominative. It should have 
been, nor did I pass; or, nor passed I. 

"Axthea teas content to call a. coach, and crossed the 
brook."— E. No. 34. 

It should be "she crossed the brook." 

"He will be welcomed with ardor, unless he destroys 
those recommendations by his faults." — R No. 160, 

"If he thinks his own judgment not sufficiently en- 
lightened, he may rectify his opinions." — R No, 1. 

"If he finds, with all his industry, and all his artifices, 
that he cannot deserve regard, or cannot obtain it, he may 
let the design fall." — R No. 1. 

The subjunctive mode ought to be used in all these 
three sentences. In the first, the meaning is, " unless he 
shoidd destroy." In the last two, the Doctor is speaking 
of his own undertaking; and he means, u the author, if 
he shoidd think, if he should find; may then rectify his 
opinions; may then let fall his design." He therefore 
should have written, "if he think; if he find J 1 

"Follow solid argument wherever it leads you," — 
L. Part 3. 

Wherever it may lead you, shall lead you, is meant; 
and, therefore, the subjunctive mode was necessary. It 
should have been, "wherever it lead you." 

"See, therefore, that your general definitions, or de- 
scriptions, are as accurate as the nature of the thing will 
bear ; see that your general divisions and distributions be 
just and exact; see that your axioms be sufficiently evi- 
dent ; see that your principles be well drawn." — L. Part 4. 

All these members are correct, except the first, where 
the verb is put in the indicative mode instead of the sub- 
junctive. All the f our have the same turn ; they are all 
in the same mode, or manner ; they should, therefore, all 



200 Specimens of False Grammar. 

have had the verb in the same form. They all required 
the subjunctive form. 



PARTICIPLES. 

"Or, it is the drawing a conclusion, which was before 
either unknown or dark." — L. Introduction. 

It should be "the drawing of a conclusion; 1 ' for, in 
this case, the active participle becomes a noun. "The 
act of drawing " is meant, and clearly understood ; and we 
cannot say, " the act drawing a conclusion." When the 
article comes before, there must be the preposition after 
the participle. To omit the preposition in such cases is 
an error very common, and therefore I have noticed the 
error in this instance, in order to put you on your guard. 

ADVERBS. 

"For thoughts are only criminal when they are first 
chosen, and then voluntarily continued." — R. N. 8. 

The station, or place, of the adverb is a great matter. 
The Doctor does not mean here that which his words 
mean. He means that " thoughts are criminal, only when 
they are first chosen and then voluntarily continued/' As 
the words stand, they mean that " thoughts are nothing 
else, or ?iothing more, than criminal," in the case supposed. 
But here are other words not very properly used. I 
should like to be informed how a thought can be chosen; 
how that is possible; and also how we can continue a 
thought, or how we can discontinue a thought at our vrill. 
The science here is so very profound that we cannot see 
the bottom of it. Swift says, " whatever is dark is deep. 
Stir a puddle, and it is deeper than a well." Doctor 
Johnson deals too much in this kind of profundity. 

There is no word in our language more frequently misused than 
this word only. People constantly write and speak such sentences 



Specimens of False Grammar. 201 

as these : "I have only received ten dollars. He only sells leather. 
He only speaks French;" and so on. The word only must be 
p laced next to the word which it modifies : I have received only 
ten dollars; he sells only leather, or leather only; he speaks only 
French. As the sentences stand in the first instance, they do not 
mean what they are intended to mean : the first means, only 
received not spent or lost ; the second, only sells leather, never 
buys any ; the third only speaks French, never writes it. 

" I have heard how some critics have been pacified with 
claret and a supper, and others laid asleep with the soft 
notes of flattery." — K. No. 1. 

Hoio means the manner in which. As, "How do you 
do?" That is, "In rohat manner do you carry yourself 
on?" But the Doctor tells us here, in other words, the 
precise manner in which the critics were pacified. The 
how, therefore, should have been that. 

"I hope not much to tire those whom I shall not happen 
to please." — E. No. 1. 

He did not mean that he did not much hope, but that 
he hoped not to tire much. "I hope I shall not much 
tire those whom I may not happen to please." This was 
what he meant ; but he does not say it. 

"And it is a good judgment alone can dictate how/ar 
to proceed in it and xohen to stop." — L. Part 4. 

Doctor Watts is speaking here of writing. In such a 
case an adverb, like how far, expressive of longitudinal 
space, introduces a rhetorical figure; for the plain mean- 
ing is, that judgment will dictate how much to write on it, 
and not how far to proceed in it. The figure, however, is 
very proper, and much better than the literal words. 
But when a figure is begun it should be carried on 
throughout, which is not the case here; for the Doctor 
begins with a figure of longitudinal space, and ends with 
a figure of time. It should have been "where to stop." 
Or, "how long to proceed in it and when to stop." To 
tell a man hoiofar he is to go into the Western countries 
of America, and when he is to stop, is a very different 
9" 



202 Specimens of False Grammar. 

thing from telling him how far he is to go and where he 
is to stop. I have dwelt thus on this distinction, for the 
purpose of putting you on the watch, and guarding you 
against confounding figures. The less you use them the 
better, till you understand more about them. 

"In sear chin g out matters of fact in times past or in 
distant places, in which case moral evidence is sufficient, 
and moral certainty is the utmost that can be attained, 
here we derive a greater assurance of the truth of it by a 
number of persons, or multitude of circumstances, con- 
curring to bear witness to it." — L. Part 3. 

The adverb here is wholly unnecessary, and it does 
harm. But what shall we say of the of it, and the to it? 
What is the antecedent of the it? Is matters of fact the 
antecedent? Then them, and not it, should have been 
the pronoun. Is evidence the antecedent? Then we have 
circumstances bearing witness to evidence! Is certainty 
the antecedent? Then we have the truth of certainty! 
Mind, my dear James, this sentence is taken from a 
treatise on logic ! How necessary it is, then, for you to 
be careful in the use of this powerful little word it! 

PKEPOSITIONS. 

"And, as this practice is a commodious subject of rail- 
lery to the gay, and of declamation to the serious, it has 
been ridiculed "— R. No. 123. 

With the gay ; for to the gay means that the raillery 
is addressed to the gay, which was not the author's 
meaning. 

" When I was deliberating to what new qualifications I 
should aspire;'— R. No. 123. 

With regard to, it ought to have been ; for we cannot 
deliberate a thing nor to a thing. 

* "If I am not commended for the beauty of my works, 
I may hope to be pardoned for their brevity." — R. No. 1. 



Specimens of False Grammar. 203 

We may commend him for the beauty of his works 
and we may pardon him for their brevity, if we deem the 
brevity a fault; but this is not what he means. He 
means that, at any rate, he shall have the merit of brevity. 
"If I am not commended for the beauty of my works, I 
may hope to be pardoned on account of their brevity." 
This was what the Doctor meant; but this would have 
marred a little the antithesis; it would have unsettled 
a little of the balance of that see-saw in which Dr. Johnson 
so much delighted, and which, falling into the hands of 
novel-writers and of Members of Parliament, has, by 
moving unencumbered with any of the Doctor's reason or 
sense, lulled so many thousands asleep! Dr. Johnson 
created a race of writers and speakers. "Mr. Speaker, 
that the state of the nation is very critical, all men must 
allow; but that it is wholly desperate, few men will 
believe." When you hear or see a sentence like this, be 
sure that the person who speaks or writes it has been 
reading Dr. Johnson, or some of his imitators. But, ob- 
serve, these imitators go no further than the frame of the 
sentence. They, in general, take special care not to imi- 
tate the Doctor in knowledge and reasoning. 

I have now lying on the table before me forty-eight 
errors, by Doctor Watts, in the use or omission of Prep- 
ositions. I will notice but two of them ; the first is an 
error of commission, the second of omission. 

" When we would prove the importance of any scrip- 
tural doctrine or duty, the multitude of texts wherein it 
is repeated and inculcated upon the reader seems natu- 
rally to instruct us that it is a matter of greater import- 
ance than other things which are but slightly or singly 
mentioned in the Bible." — L. Part 3. 

The words repeated and inculcated both apply to upon; 
but we cannot repeat a thing upon a reader, and the 
words here used mean this. When several verbs or par- 
ticiples are joined together by a copulative conjunction, 



204 Specimens of False Grammar. 

care must be taken that the act described by each verb, 
or participle, be such as can be performed by the agent, 
and performed, too, in the manner, or for the purpose, or 
on the object, designated by the other words of the sen- 
tence. 

The other instance of error in the use of the Preposi- 
tion occurs in the very first sentence in the Treatise on 
Logic, 

46 Logic is the art of using reason well in our inquiries 
after truth, and the communication of it to others ." — L. 
Introduction. 

The meaning of the words is this : that "Logic is the 
art of using reason well in our inquiries after truth, and 
is also the communication of it to others." To be sure 
we do understand that it means that " Logic is the art of 
using reason well in our inquiries after truth, and in the 
communication of it to others ;" but, surely, in a case like 
this, no room for doubt, or for hesitation, ought to have 
been left. Nor is "using reason well" a well-chosen 
phrase. It may mean treating it well ; not ill-treating 
it. i& Using reason properly or employing reason well," 
would have been better. For, observe, Doctor Watts is 
here giving a definition of the thing of which he was 
about to treat; and he is speaking to persons unac- 
quainted with that thing ; for as to those acquainted with 
it, no definition was wanted. Clearness, everywhere de- 
sirable, was here absolutely necessary. 

CONJUNCTIONS. 

"As, notwithstanding all that wit, or malice, or pride, 
or prudence, will be able to suggest, men and women 
must, at last, pass their lives together, I have never, there- 
fore, thought those writers friends to human happiness 
who endeavor to excite in either sex a general contempt 
or suspicion of the other." — R. No. 149 r 



Specimens of False GLrammar. 205 

The as is unnecessary ; or the therefore is unnecessary. 

" But the happy historian has no other labor than of 
gathering what tradition pours down before him." — R. 
No. 122. 

"Some have advanced, without due attention to the 
consequences of this notion, that certain virtues have 
their correspondent faults, and therefore to exhibit either 
apart is to deviate from probability." — K. No. 4. 

"But if the power of example is so great as to take 
possession of the memory by a kind of violence, care 
ought to be taken that, when the choice is unrestrained, 
the best examples only should be exhibited; and that 
which is likely to operate so strongly should not be mis- 
chievous or uncertain in its effects." — R. No. 4. 

It should have been, in the first of these extracts, " than 
that of gathering;'' in the second, "and that therefore;" 
in the third, " and that that which is likely." If the Doc- 
tor wished to avoid putting two thats close together, he 
should have chosen another form for his sentence. The 
that ivhich is a relative, and the conjunction that was 
required to go before it. 

" It is, therefore, a useful thing, when we have a funda- 
mental truth, we use the synthetic method to explain it." 
— L. Part 4. 

It should have been that we use, or to use. 



WRONG PLACING OF WORDS. 

Of all the faults to be found in writing, this is one of 
the most common, and perhaps it leads to the greatest 
number of misconceptions. All the words may be the 
proper words to be used upon the occasion; and yet, by 
a misplacing of a part of them, the meaning may be 
wholly destroyed ; and even made to be the contrary of 
what it ought to be. 

u I asked the question with no other intention than to 



206 Specimens of False Grammar. 

set the gentleman free from the necessity of silence, and 
give him an opportunity of mingling on equal terms with 
a polite assembly, from which, however uneasy, he could 
not then escape, by a hind introduction of the only sub- 
ject on which I believed him to be able to speak with 
propriety."— K. No. 126. 

This is a very bad sentence altogether. "However un- 
easy" applies to assembly, and not to gentleman. Only 
observe how easily this might have been avoided. " From 
which he, however uneasy, could not then escape. 11 After 
this we have "he could not then escape, by a kind intro- 
duction." We know what is meant; but the Doctor, with 
all his commas, leaves the sentence confused. Let us see 
whether we cannot make it clear. " I asked the question 
with no other intention than, by a kind introduction of 
the only subject on which I believed him to be able to 
speak with propriety, to set the gentlen^n free from the 
necessity of silence, and to give him an opportunity of 
mingling on equal terms with a polite assembly, from 
which he, however uneasy, could not then escape.' 1 

" Reason is the glory of human nature, and one of the 
chief eminences whereby we are raised above our fellow- 
creatures, the brutes, in this lower world." — L. Introduc- 
tion. 

I have before showed an error in thejlrst sentence of 
Doctor Watt's work. This is the second sentence. The 
words, "in this lower world," are not words misplaced 
only; they are wholly unnecessary, and they do great 
harm; for they do these two things: first, they imply 
that there are brutes in the higher world; and, second, 
they excite a doubt, whether we are raised above those 
brutes. 

I might, my dear James, greatly extend the number of 
my extracts from both these authors ; but, these, I trust, 
are enough. I had noted down about two hundred errors 
in Doctor Johnson's Lives of the Poets ; but afterwards 



Specimens of False Grammar. 207 

perceiving that he had revised and corrected the Rambler 
with extraordinary care, I chose to make my extracts 
from that work rather than from the Lives of the Poets. 



DOUBLE-NEGATIVE AND ELLIPSIS. 

Before I dismiss the specimens of bad grammar, I will 
just take, from Tull, a sentence »which contains striking 
instances of the misapplication of Negatives, and of the 
Ellipsis. In our language two negatives applied to the 
same verb, or to the same words of any sort, amount to an 
affirmative; as, "JDo riot give him none of your money." 
That is to say, "Give him some of your money," though 
the contrary is meant. It should be, "Do not give him 
any of your money." Errors, as to this matter, occur 
most frequently when the sentence is formed in such a 
manner as to lead the writer out of sight and out of 
sound of the first negative before he comes to the point 
where he thinks a second is required ; as, "Neither Rich- 
ard nor Peter, as I have been informed, and indeed as it 
has been proved to me, never gave James authority to 
write to me." You see it ought to be ever. But in this 
case, as in most others, there requires nothing more than 
a little thought. You see clearly that two negatives, ap- 
plied to the same verb, destroy the negative effect of each 
other. "I will not never write." This is the contrary of 
"I will never write." 

The Ellipsis, of which I spoke in Letter XIX, paragraph 
227, ought to be used with great care. Read that para- 
graph again ; and then attend to the following sentence of 
Mr. Tull, which I select in order to show you that very 
fine thoughts may be greatly marred by a too free use of 
the Ellipsis. 

" It is strange that no author should never have written 
fully of the fabric of ploughs ! Men of greatest learning 
have spent their time in contriving instruments to measure 



208 Specimens of False Grammar. 

the immense distance of the stars, and in finding out the 
dimensions and even weight of the planets. They think 
it more eligible to study the art of ploughing the sea 
with ships than of tilling the land with ploughs. They 
bestow the utmost of their skill, learnedly to pervert tlie 
natural use of all the elements for destruction of their 
own species by the bloody art of war ; and some waste 
their whole lives in studying how to arm death with new 
engines of horror, and inventing an infinite variety of 
slaughter; but think it beneath men of learning (who 
only are capable of doing it) to employ their learned 
labors in the invention of new, or even improving the 
old, instruments for increasing of bread." 

You see the never ought to be ever. You see that the 
the is left out before the word greatest, and again before 
weight, and, in this last-mentioned instance, the leaving 
of it out makes the words mean the " even weight ;" that 
is to say, not the odd weight ; instead of " even the 
weight, 1 ' as the author meant. The conjunction that is 
left out before " of tilling;" before destruction, the article 
the is again omitted \ in is left out before inventing, and 
also before improving; and, at the close, the is left out 
before increasing. To see so fine a sentence marred in 
this way is, I hope, quite enough to guard you against 
the frequent commission of similar errors. 

We often see the word alone wrongly used for only; as, "To 
which. 1 am not alone bound by honor, but by law ;" but Mr. Tull 
uses only instead of alone. He should have said, " who alone are 
capable of doing it." 



Mrrors and Nonsense, etc. 209 



LETTER XXII. 

errors and nonsense in a king's speech. 
My dear James: 

In my first Letter, I observed to you that to the func- 
tions of statesmen and legislators was due the highest 
respect which could be shown by man to anything human ; 
but I, at the same time, observed that, as the degree and 
quality of our respect rose in proportion to the influence 
whjch the different branches of knowledge naturally had 
iu the affairs and on the conditions of men, so, in cases of 
imperfection in knowledge, or of negligence in the appli- 
cation of it, or of its perversion to bad purposes, all the 
feelings opposite to that of respect rose in the same pro- 
portion ; and to one of these cases I have now to direct 
your attention. 

The speeches of the king are read by him to the Parlia- 
ment. They are composed by his ministers or select 
councillors. They are documents of great importance, 
treating of none but weighty matters; they are always 
styled Most Gracious, and are heard and answered with 
the most profound respect. 

The persons who settle upon what shall be the topics 
of these speeches, and who draw the speeches up, are a 
Lord High Chancellor, a First Lord of the Treasury, a 
Lord President of the Council, three Secretaries of State, 
a First Lord of the Admiralty, a Master General of the 
Ordnance, a Chancellor of the Exchequer, and perhaps 
one or two besides. These persons are called, when 
spoken of in a body, the Ministry. They are all members 
of the king's constitutional council, called the Privy 
Council, without whose assent the king can issue no 
proclamation nor any order affecting the people. This 
council, Judge Blackstone, taking the words of Coke, calls 



210 Errors and Nonsense 

"a noble, honorable, and reverend assembly." So that, in 
the Ministry, who are selected from the persons who com- 
pose this assembly, the nation has a right to expect some- 
thing very near to perfection in point of judgment and of 
practical talent. 

How destitute of judgment and of practical talent these 
persons have been, in the capacity of statesmen and of 
legislators, the present miserable and perilous state of 
England amply demonstrates; and I am now about to 
show you that they are equally destitute in the capacity 
of writers. There is some poet who says, 

" Of all the arts in which the learn' d excel, 
The first in rank is that of icriting well." * 

And though a man may possess great knowledge, as a 
statesman and as a legislator, without being able to per- 
form what this poet would call writing well; yet, surely, 
we have a right to expect in a minister the capacity of 
being able to write grammatically ; the capacity of put- 
ting his own meaning clearly down upon paper. But, in 
the composing of a king's speech, it is not one man, but 
nine men, whose judgment and practical talent are em- 
ployed. A king's speech is, too, a very short piece of 
writing. The topics are all distinct. Very little is said 
upon each. There is no reasoning. It is all plain matter 
of fact, or of simple observation. The thing is done with 
all the advantages of abundant time for examination and 
re-examination. Each of the ministers has a copy of the 
speech to read, to examine, and to observe upon; and 
when no one has anything left to suggest in the way of 
alteration or improvement, the speech is agreed to, and 
put into the mouth of the king. 

Surely, therefore, if in any human effort perfection can 
be expected, we have a right to expect it in a king's 

* Of all those arts in which the wise excel, 
Nature's chief masterpiece is writing well. 

Sheffield, Earl of Buckinghamshire. 



In a King's Speech. 211 

speech. You shall now see, then, what pretty stuff is 
put together, and delivered to the Parliament, under the 
name of king's speeches. 

The speech which I am about to examine is, indeed, a 
speech of the regent : but I might take*any other of these 
speeches. I choose this particular speech because the 
subjects of it are familial* in America as well as in "England. 
It was spoken on the 8th of November, 1814. I shall 
take a sentence at a time, in order to avoid confusion. 

u My Lords and Gentlemen : It is with deep regret that 
/ am again obliged to announce the continuance of his 
majesty's lamented indisposition." 

Even in this short sentence there is something equiv- 
ocal; for it may be that the prince's regret arises from 
his being obliged to announce, and not from the thing 
announced. If he had said, "With deep regret I an- 
nounce," or, "I announce with deep regret," there would 
have been nothing equivocal. And, in a composition like 
this, all ought to be as clear as the pebbled brook. 

"It would have given me great satisfaction to have been 
enabled to communicate to you the termination of the war 
between this country and the United States of America. 1 ' 

The double compound times of the verbs, in the first 
part of the sentence, make the words mean that it would, 
before the prince came to the House, have given him great 
satisfaction to be enabled to communicate; whereas he 
meant, "It would noto have given me great satisfaction to 
be enabled to communicate." In the latter part of the 
sentence we have a little nonsense. What does termina- 
tion mean? It means, in this case, end or conclusion; 
and thus the prince wished to communicate an end to the 
wise men by whom he was surrounded ! To communicate 
is to impart to another any thing that we have in our 
possession or within our power. And so, the prince 
wished to impart the end to the noble lords and honorable 
gentlemen. He might wish to impart, or communicate 



212 Errors and Nonsense 

the neios, or the intelligence of the end; but he could 
not communicate the end itself. What should we say, if 
some one were to tell us, that an officer had arrived, and 
brought home the termination of a battle, and carried it 
to Carlton House and communicated it to the prince? 
We should laugh at our informant's ignorance of gram- 
mar, though we should understand what he meant. And, 
shall we, then, be so partial and so unjust as to reverence 
in king's councillors that which we should laugh at in one 
of our neighbors? To act thus would be^ my dear son, a 
base abandonment of our reason, which is, to use the 
words of Dr. Watts, the common gift of God to man. 

"Although this war originated in the most unprovoked 
aggression on the part of the Government of the United 
States, and was calculated to promote the designs of the 
common enemy of Europe against the rights and inde- 
pendence of all other nations, I never have ceased to 
entertain a sincere desire to bring it to a conclusion on 
just and honorable terms." 

The the most would lead us to suppose that there had 
been more than one aggression, and that the war origi- 
nated in the most unprovoked of them; whereas the 
prince's meaning was that the aggression was an unpro- 
voked one, unprovoked in the superlative degree; and 
that, therefore, it was a most unprovoked aggression. 
The words all other nations may mean all nations except 
Englayid; or, all nations out of Europe; or, all nations 
other than the United States; or, all nations except the 
enemy's own nation. Guess you which of these is the 
meaning ; I confess that I am wholly unable to determine 
the question. But, what does the close of the sentence 
mean when taken into view with the although at the 
beginning? Does the prince mean that he would be 
justified in wanting to make peace on unjust and dis- 
honorable terms because the enemy had been the ag- 
gressor? He might, indeed, wish to make it on terms 



In a King's Speech. 213 

dishonorable, and even disgraceful, to the enemy; but 
could he possibly wish to make it on unjust terms ? Does 
he mean that an aggression, however wicked and unpro- 
voked, would give him a right to do injustice? Yet, if 
he do not mean this, what does he mean? Perhaps (for 
there is no certainty) he may mean that he wishes to 
bring the war to a conclusion as soon as he can get just 
and honorable terms from the enemy; but, then, what is 
he to do with the although? Let us try this: "I am 
ready," say you, "to make peace, if you will give me just 
terms, although you are the aggressor P To be sure you 
are, whether I be the aggressor or not! All that you can 
possibly have the face to ask of me is justice; and, there- 
fore, why do you connect your wish for peace with this 
although? Either you mean that my aggression gives 
you a right to demand of me more than justice, or you 
talk nonsense. Nor must we overlook the word "govern- 
ment" which is introduced here. In the sentence before, 
the prince wished to communicate the end of the war 
between "this country and the United States;" but in 
this sentence we are at war with "the Government of the 
"United States." This was a poor trick of sophistry, and 
as such we will let it pass; only observing that such 
low trickery is not very becoming in men selected from 
u a noble, honorable, and reverend assembly." 

"I am still engaged in negotiations for this purpose." 

That is, the purpose of bringing the war to a conclusion. 
A very good purpose; but why still? He had not told 
his nobles and his boroughmen that he had been engaged 
in negotiations. Even this short, simple sentence could 
not be made without fault. 

"The success of them must, however, depend on my 
disposition being met with corresponding sentiments on 
the part of the enemy." 

Now, suppose I were to say, "My wagon was met with 
Mr. Tredw ell's coach." Would you not think that some- 



214 Errors and Xon sense 

body had met the wagon and coach, both going together 
the same way? To be sure you would. But if I were to 
say. '-My wagon was met by Mr. TredwelTs coach," you 
would think that they had approached each other from 
different spots. And, therefore, the prince should have 
said, u met by.' 1 This sentence, however, short as it hap- 
pily is, is too long to be content with one error. Dispo- 
>. in this sense of the word, means state, or bent, or 
temper, of m indj and the word sentiments means thoughts, 
or opinions. So, here we have a temper of mind met by 
thoughts. Thoughts may correspond or agree with a tem- 
per of mind ; but how are they to meet it? If the prince 
had said. " My disposition being met by a corresponding 
disposition on the part of the enemy/' he would have 
uttered plain and dignified language. 

"The operations of his majesty's forces by sea and 
land in the Chesapeake, in the course of the present year, 
have been attended with most brilliant and successful 
results." 

Were there only the bad placing of the different mem- 
bers of this sentence, the fault would be sufficient. But 
we do not know whether the prince means operations by 
sea and land, ox forces by sea and land. 

It seems to me there is another error here. The prince speaks 
of operations of "forces by sea and land in the Chesapeake." The 
Chesapeake is a bay. How can there be operations of forces by 
land in the Chesapeake? Does he mean the operations of the forces 
when they got to the bottom of the bay ? 

"The flotilla of the enemy in the Patuxent has been 
destroyed. The signal defeat of their land forces enabled 
a detachment of his majesty's army to take possession of 
the city of Washington ; and the spirit of enterprise, which 
has characterized all the movements in this quarter, has 
produced on the inhabitants a deep and sensible impres- 
sion of the calamities of a war in which they have been so 
wantonly involved." 



In a King's Speech. 215 

Enemy is not a noun of multitude, like gang or House 
of Commons, or den of thieves; and, therefore, when used 
in the singular, must have singular pronouns and verbs 
to agree with it. Their, in the second of these sentences, 
should have been his. A sensible impression is an impres- 
sion felt; a deep impression is one more felt. Therefore 
it was "a sensible and deep impression." But, indeed, 
sensible had no business there ; for an impression that is 
deep must be sensible. What would you think of a man 
who should say, " I have not only been stabbed, but my 
skin has been cut?''' Why, you would think, to be sure, 
that he must be a man selected from the noble, honorable, 
and reverend assembly at Whitehall ! 

" The expedition directed from Halifax to the northern 
coast of the "United States has terminated in a manner 
not less satisfactory" 

Than what? The prince has told us, before this, of 
nothing that has terminated satisf actorily. He has talked 
of a brilliant result, and of an impression made on the 
inhabitants; but of no termination has he talked; nor 
has he said a word about satisfaction. We must always 
take care how we use, in one sentence, words which refer 
to anything said in former sentences. 

" The successful course of this operation has been fol- 
lowed by the immediate submission of the extensive and 
important district east of the Penobscot river to his maj- 
esty's arms? 

This sentence is a disgrace even to a ministry with a 
Jenkinson at its head. What do they mean by a course 
being folloived by a submissio?i ? And then, "has been 
followed by the immediate submission V One would 
think that some French emigrant priest was employed to 
write this speech. He, indeed, would say, "a ete suivie 
par la soumission immediate." But when we make use 
of any word like immediate, which carries us back to the 
time and scene of action, we must use the past time of 



216 On Putting Sentences Together, 

the verb, and say, "was followed by the immediate sub- 
mission.' That is to say, teas then followed by the then 
immediate ; and not has now been followed by the then 
immediate submission. The close of this sentence exhibits 
a fine instance of want of skill in the placing of the parts 
of a sentence. Could these noble and reyerend persons 
find no place but the end for "to his majesty s arms?" 
There was, but they could not see it, a place made on 
purpose, after the word submission. 

It is unnecessary, my dear James, for me to proceed 
further with an exposure of the bad grammar and the 
nonsense of this speech. There is not, in the whole 
speech, one single sentence that is free from error. Nor 
will you be at all surprised at this, if eyer you should 
hear those persons uttering their own speeches in those 
places which, when you were a naughty little boy, you 
used to call the "Thieves' Houses." If you should eyer 
hear them there, stammering and repeating and putting 
forth their nonsense, your wonder will be, not that they 
wrote a king's speech so badly, but that they contriyed to 
put upon paper sentences sufficiently grammatical to en- 
able us to guess at the meaning. 



LETTER XXIII. 

on putting sentences together, and on figurative 
language. 
My dear James: 

I have now done with the subject of grammar, which, 
as you know, teaches us to use words in a proper manner. 
But though you now, I hope, understand how to avoid 
error in the forming of sentences, I think it right not to 
conclude my instructions without saying a few words 
upon the subject of adding sentence to sentence, and on 
the subject of figurative language. 



and on Figurative Language. 217 

Language is made use of for one of three purposes; 
namely, to inform, to convince, or to persuade. The 
first, requiting merely the talent of telling what we know, 
is a matter of little difficulty. The second demands rea- 
soning. The third, besides reasoning, demands all the 
aid that we can obtain from the use of figures of speech, 
or, as they are sometimes calle^ figures of rhetoric, which 
last word means the power of pv suasion. 

Whatever may be the purpose for which we use lan- 
guage, it seldom can happen that we do not stand in 
need of more than one sentence; and, therefore, others 
must be added. There is no precise rule; there can be 
no precise rule, with regard to the manner of doing this. 
When we have said one thing, we must add another ; and 
so on, until we have said all that we have to say. But we 
ought to take care, and great care, that if any words in a 
sentence relate, in any way, to words that have gone be- 
fore, we make these words correspond grammatically 
with those foregoing words ; an instance of the want of 
which care you have seen in paragraph 178. 

The order of the matter will be, in almost all cases, 
that of your thoughts. Sit down to icrite ichat yon have 
thought, and not to think what you shall icrite. Use the 
first words that occur to you, and never attempt to alter 
a thought; for that which has come of itself into your 
mind is likely to pass into that of another more readily 
and with more effect than anything which you can, by 
reflection, invent. 

Never stop to make choice of words. Put down your 
thought in words just as they come. Follow the order 
which your thought will point out ; and it will push you 
on to get it upon the paper as quickly and as clearly as 
possible. 

Thoughts come much faster than we can put them 
upon paper. They produce one another : and the order 
of their coming is, in almost every case, the best possible 
10 



218 On Putting Sentences Together* 

order that they can have on paper; yet, if you have 
several in your mind, rising above each other in point of 
force, the most forcible will naturally come the last upon 
paper. 

Mr. Lindley Murray gives rules about long sentences 
and short sentences* and about a due mixture of long and 
short ; and he also gives rules about the letters that sen- 
tences should begin with, and the syllables that they 
should end with. Such rules might be very well if we 
were to sing our writing; but when the use of writing 
is to inform, to convince, or to persuade, what can it 
have to do with such rules ? 

There are certain connecting tcords which it is of im- 
portance to use properly ; such as therefore, which means 
for that cause, for that reason. "We must take care, 
when we use such words, that there is occasion for using 
them. We must take care that when we use but, or for, 
or any other connecting word, the sense of our sentences 
requires such word to be used ; for, if such words be im- 
properly used, they throw all into confusion. Tou have 
seen the shameful effect of an although in the king's 
speech, which I noticed in my last Letter. The adverbs 
when* then, tchile, noic, there, and some others, are con- 
necting words, and not used in their strictly literal sense. 
For example: "Well, then, I will not do it." Then, in its 
literal sense, means, at that time, or in that time; as, " I 
was in America then." But "Well, then" means, "Well, 
if that be so" or u let that be so" or "in that case." You 
have only to accustom yourself a little to reflect on the 
meaning of these words; for that will soon teach you 
never to employ them improperly. 

A writmg, or written discourse, is generally broken into 
'paragraphs. When a new paragraph should begin, the 
nature of your thoughts must tell you. The propriety of 
it will be pointed out to you by the difference between 
the thoughts that are coming and those which have gone 



and on Figurative Language. 219 

before. It is impossible to frame rules for regulating 
such divisions. When a man divides his work into Parts, 
Books, Chapters, and Sections, he makes the division 
according to that which the matter has taken in his mind ; 
and, when he comes to write, he has no other guide for 
the distribution of his matter into sentences and para- 
graphs, 

Never torite about any matter that you do not well 
understand. If you clearly understand all about your 
matter, you will never want thoughts, and thoughts 
instantly become words. 

One of the greatest of all faults in writing and in speak- 
ing is this : the using of many words to say little. In 
order to guard yourself against this fault, inquire what is 
the substance or amount of what you have said. Take a 
long speech of some talking lord, and put down upon 
paper what the amount of it is. You will most likely 
find that the amount is very small; but, at any rate, when 
you get it, you will then be able to examine it, and to tell 
what it is worth. A very few examinations of this sort 
will so frighten you, that you will be forever after upon 
your guard against talking a great deal and saying little. 

Figurative language is very fine when properly em- 
ployed; but figures of rhetoric are edge-tools, and two- 
edged tools, too. Take care how you touch them ! They 
are called figures, because they represent other things 
than the words in their literal meaning stand for. For 
instance : " The tyrants oppress and starve the people. 
The people would live amidst abundance, if those cormo- 
rants did not devour the fruit of their labor." I shall 
only observe to you, upon this subject, that, if you use 
figures of rhetoric, you ought to take care that they do 
not make nonsense of what you say; nor excite the ridi- 
cule of those to whom you write. Mr. Murray, in an 
address to his students, tells them " that he is about to 
offer them some advice with regard to their future walks 



220 On Putting Sentences Together, 

in the paths of literature." Now, though a man may take 
a icalk along a path, a walk means also the ground laid 
out in a certain shape, and such a walk is wider than a 
path. He, in another part of this address, tells them 
that they are in the morning of life, and that that is the 
season for exertion. The morning, my dear James, is not 
a season. The gear, indeed, has seasons, but the day has 
none. If he had said the spring of life, then he might 
have added the season of exertion. I told you they were 
edge-tools. Beware of them. 

I am now, my dear son, arrived at the last paragraph 
of my treatise, and I hope that, when you arrive at it, 
you will understand grammar sufficiently to enable you 
to write without committing frequent and glaring errors. 
I shall now leave you, for about four months, to read and 
write English ; to practise what you have now been taught. 
At the end of those four months I shall have prepared a 
Grammar to teach you the French language, which lan- 
guage I hope to hear you speak, and to see you write 
well, at the end of one year from this time. With English 
and French on your tongue and in your pen, you have a 
resource not only greatly valuable in itself, but a resource 
that you can be deprived of by none of those changes and 
chances which deprive men of pecuniary possessions, and 
which, in some cases, make the purse-proud man of yes- 
terday a crawling sycophant to-day. Health, without 
which life is not worth having, you will hardly fail to 
secure by early rising, exercise, sobriety, and abstemious- 
ness as to food. Happiness, or misery, is in the mind. 
It is the mind that lives ; and the length of life ought to 
be measured by the number and importance of our ideas, 
and not by the number of our days. Never, therefore, 
esteem men merely on account of their riches or their 
station. Kespect goodness, find it where you may. 
Honor talent wherever you behold it unassociated with 
vice ; but honor it most when accompanied with exertion, 



and on Figurative Language, 221 

and especially when exerted in the cause of truth and 
justice ; and, above all things, hold it in honor when it 
steps forward to protect defenceless innocence against 
the attacks of powerful guilt. 

It is true that figures are edge-tools; but even edge-tools are 
perfectly safe in the hands of those who know how to use them. 
And with a little care and attention, anybody of common under- 
standing may learn how to use the ordinary figures of rhetoric, 
which are powerful auxiliaries in rendering speech effective. 
There is nothing that impresses like figures. They are edge-tools 
in another sense ; for they cut like swords and wound like daggers. 
Daniel CTConnell once silenced a troublesome opponent by sud- 
denly turning on him and exclaiming : ' ' Sit down, you pestiferous 
ramcat ! " Lord Chatham finely designates the corrupt govern- 
ment contractor and jobber as ''that blood-sucker, that muck- 
worm that calls itself 'the friend of government.'" "One 
should never take a vacation till the sexton gives him one, v 
is far more forcible than "One should never cease working till 
death." Instead of saying that one must not express high, noble 
thoughts before low, vulgar people, how much more expressive it 
is to say, ' ' Do not cast pearls before swine. " When Daniel Webster 
said of Alexander Hamilton, " He smote the rock of the national 
resources, and abundant streams of revenue burst forth; he 
touched the dead corpse of public credit, and it sprang upon its 
feet!' 1 he uttered something far more impressive, far more forcible 
and beautiful, than if he had merely declared that Hamilton had 
improved the finances and strengthened the public credit of the 
country. Everybody, the most illiterate as well as the most 
learned, uses figures. The illiterate man uses them unconsciously ; 
and so does the learned man in the ardor of speech ; in fact, most 
people use them, and ought to use them, unconsciously; that is, 
without thinking that they are using figures. When a person 
exclaims, on seeing a large, fat man coming along, " Here comes 
Jumbo!" he never thinks that he is using a figure; and I have no 
doubt that even Cobbett himself, when he said that figures are 
edge-tools, never suspected -that he was using a figure. Our 
greatest writers, especially the poets, are full of figures. Shakes- 
peare bristles with them ; his works have more figures, and more 
happily-used figures, than perhaps those of any other author. In 
Macbeth alone there are figures of almost every description. Just 
count the figures in the murder scene and in the interview between 



222 On Putting Sentences Together, 

Macbeth and his wife after the murder, and you will be amazed 
at their number and variety. 

Of course, I do not pretend, in these few words at the end of the 
book, to teach you all about figures of rhetoric; but I wish to give 
you an idea of what they are, that you may not be entirely ignorant 
of the matter. 

Though rhetoricians give names to a great number of deviations 
from the ordinary mode of expression, there are just about a dozen 
figures of rhetoric whose nature and use are worth studying. The 
others are common turnings and windings in language, in which 
nobody ever makes a mistake ; but which, closely regarded, are 
made out to be figures, and dubbed with hard Greek names, the 
knowledge of which is of no possible use. Hence Butler's famous 
couplet ; 

" For all a rhetorician's rules 
Teach nothing but to name his tools." 

Of these dozen figures, the most common are the metaphor and 
the simile. Definitions are hard, and sometimes very unsatisfac- 
tory; but when I say that the sentence " Doctor Johnson was a 
gnarled oak" contains a metaphor, and that the sentence " Doctor 
Johnson was like a gnarled oak " contains a simile, you will see 
at once what both are. "He is a lion," contains a metaphor; 
" he is like a lion " contains a simile. The metaphor is sometimes 
called an abridged simile, for it is putting one thing for another 
which it resembles, instead of saying it is like it. The simile is 
always introduced by the words like, or so, or words of similar 
import. "Charity, like the sun, brightens all it shines upon. A 
metaphor, like a beam of light, brightens and enlivens its object 
whenever it is used." When somebody cried out at the battle of 
Quebec, "They fly! they fly!" and General Wolff asked, "Who 
fly?" both used a figure; for men can only flee, not fly. When a 
little boy calls out, "Look at that frog! I will let this stone fly at 
his head!" he uses a figure; so that, long before he knows what 
metaphors are, he learns to use them rightly enough. Look at 
Coleridge's sentences about Cobbett, on page 210 of the Life, and 
you will find quite a number of metaphors. 

There is another figure, called metonymy, which looks,, at first 
sight, like the metaphor; but which, on closer inspection, will be 
found to be essentially different. While the metaphor is really a 
departure from the ordinary form of speech, metonymy, which is 
termed a change of names, is one of the most ordinary expressions. 
"The kettle boils ; the lamp burns , he smokes his pipe." Now, is 



and on Figurative Language. 223 

it the kettle that boils, or the water in it ? the lamp that burns, or 
the oil? We use these expressions without ever thinking that we 
are using figurative language , for it is not a departure from the 
ordinary form of speech, it is everyday speech, everyday and 
common language. But, when we say, "Experience is the lamp 
by which my feet are guided;" or " We shall never light the pipe 
of peace until our rights are restored ;" or "This was the rock on 
which he split;" the language rises at once in force and impress- 
iveness, and we feel that there is a deviation from the common 
mode of expression. The former is metonymy, and the latter 
metaphor. "He is fond of his bottle; he drank three glasses; he 
keeps a good table ;" these, you see, are merely a change of names. 
' ■ The gin-palace is the recruiting-shop for the penitentiary ; Senator 
Conkling sawed off the limb on which he sat ; the politicians are. 
hungry for office, for they have been fasting for twenty years:" 
these are metaphors, and you see they convey a picture to the 
mind which no other words can convey so well. 

An allegoky is a sort of continued metaphor, by which an 
imaginary history with a veiled meaning may be told. Macaulay 
says Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress is the finest allegory which has 
been produced in two thousand years. For another fine example, 
see 80th Psalm. 

Personification is the giving of life to inanimate things, or the 
giving of speech and reason to objects, insects, and animals, as in 
fables. Cobbett's story of the quarrel in the pot-shop has good 
examples of this figure. To personify is to speak, for instance, of 
winter and war as of a man ; of spring and peace as of a woman. 
" Lo! steel-clad War his gorgeous standard rears!" 

" How sleep the brave, who sink to rest 
By all their country's wishes blest 1 
When Spring, with dewy fingers cold, 
Eeturns to deck their hallowed mould, 
She there shall dress a sweeter sod 
Than Fancy's feet have ever trod." 

There is another form of personification, a lower form, in which 
we give the qualities of beings to inanimate objects : we sometimes 
speak of a raging storm, a cruel disease, a remorseless sword, a 
scornful lip, a dying lamp, the smiling harvest, the thirsty ground, 
a fearless pen, the babbling brook. 

Synecdoche is taking a part for the whole, or the whole for a 
part; as, He has a keen eye; he has seen eighty icinters; all the 
world runs after him. 

Interrogation is asking a question which does not need an 



224 On Putting Sentences Together, 

answer ; as, Can any man count the stars ? Will not the Judge of 
all the earth do right ? This is a favorite figure in oratory. 

Exclamation is the uttering of some expression of surprise, or of 
some emotion of the mind, as, What a piece of work is man! how 
noble in reason ! how infinite in faculties ! Would that some good 
angel had put Cobbett's grammar into that boy's hands! 

Irony is saying the opposite of what one means; as, Cobbett 
was remarkable for his meekness and humility ! John Bull's Ad- 
dress to Brother Jonathan (par. 214) is a good example. See also 
page 193 of the Life. Here is another example : 

" So goes the world ;— if wealthy, you may call 
This, friend ; that, brother ;— friends and brothers all. 
Though you are worthless, witless ; never mind it : 
You may have been a stable-boy— what then? 
'Tis wealth, good sir, makes honorable men." 

Antithesis is the comparing or placing in contrast of opposite 
qualities : as. Though poor, yet proud ; though submissive, gay. 
The prodigal robs his heir, the miser robs himself. Antithesis is 
closely allied to epigram, which is a short, pithy saying; as, 
When you have nothing to say, say it. Wendell Phillips is noted 
for his epigrammatic style. 

Hyperbole is some extravagant expression, employed to heighten 
the impression conveyed. Macbeth says that the great ocean will 
not wash his hand clean from the blood-stains on it, but that his 
hand will rather incarnadine the great ocean ; while Lady Macbeth 
says that ' ■ all the sweets of Arabia will not sweeten this little 
hand." Antony's declaration that if he were an orator like 
Brutus, he would "make the stones of Rome rise in mutiny," is 
another good example. "Rivers of waters run down mine eyes," 
is the Psalmist's fine figure. 

Apostrophe is a sudden turning off from the subject of dis- 
course to address some absent or dead person or thing as present. 
When the news of Lord Byron's death came to England, John Jay, 
the famous preacher, spoke of him and his works in his pulpit; 
then he suddenly turned and addressed him as if he were present : 
u O Byron, hadst thou listened to the words of soberness and 
truth ; hadst thou followed the counsels of the wise and good ; 
hadst thou repressed thy passions, formed nobler aims and pursued 
a nobler ideal of life, what a different tale we would have had to 
tell ! what a different example, for all generations, thy life would 
have afforded!'' His apostrophe was something like this; it is 
twenty-five years since I read it 7 I give it as I remember it; I 



and on Figurative Language. 225 

only know it made a deep impression on me at the time. And 
Byron himself, in his wonderful Childe Harold, gives us perhaps 
the finest apostrophe in our language. He is speaking of the 
ocean, when he suddenly turns and addresses it in those noble 
lines beginning : 

>J Roll on, thou deep and dark blue Ocean— roll 1 
Ten thousand fleets sweep over thee in vain. 
Man marks the earth with ruin— his control 
Stops with the shore." 

Climax is rising from one point to another till the highest 
is reached, or descending from one point to another till the 
lowest is reached. I have read somewhere this capital example, 
which is said to be from a sermon on Christian progress by a 
negro preacher : "If you cannot fly, run ; if you cannot run, walk ; 
if you cannot walk, crawl; if you cannot crawl, loorm it along!" 

Allitekation is the repeating of the same letter at the beginning 
of each of two or more words in the same line or sentence. One of 
the characters in Shakespeare's Henry VIII speaks thus of Cardinal 
Woolsey : 

"Begot of butchers and by butchers bred, 
How high his highness holds his haughty head." 

Besides these, there are figures of etymology and figures of 
syntax. The former are hardly worth mentioning, being simply 
such changes in words as o'er for over, tho } for though, 'gainst for 
against, His for it is, withouten for without, enchain for chain, and a 
few similar ones, all of which are called by the hardest of Greek 
names. These figures are simply deviations from the usual orthog- 
raphy of words, and are sometimes called figures of orthography. 
The figures of syntax are four in number: ellipsis, pleonasm, 
enallage, and hypekbaton. The first, which has already been 
explained, consists, you will remember, in leaving understood 
some word or words; as, "This is the man I mean," instead of 
"whom I mean." Pleonasm is the opposite of this; that is, the 
using of superfluous words ; and the most common example of it 
is in the use of the word got. " What have you got? I have got 
a book; you have got a horse." These gots may all be left out. 
The Bible is full of this figure, as indeed of all figures ; as, " There 
shall not be left one stone upon another that shall not be thrown 
down. Oh ye inhabitants of the world, and dwellers on the earth!" 
Enallage may be said to be the name given to the grammatical 
mistakes which the poets are allowed to make, on account of the 
shackles in which they are obliged to walk. In Leigh Hunt's 
poem, " The Glove and the Lions," occur these lines: 
10* 



226 On Putting Sentences Together, 

" De Lorge's love o'erheard the king, a beauteous, lively dame, 
With dark bright eyes, which always seemed the same" 

Xbw, according to the rules of grammar, these lines declare that 
the king was a beauteous, lively dame ; but the poet was obliged 
to write thus for the sake of the rhyme. This is called enallage. 
"Milton's "Beelzebub than whom" may also be c allage. 

Hypei 2what similar to inversion, which latter con- 

sists in placing tlie predicate or the object before the subject; as. 
In came the king ; down fell the supplicant ; him I adore. Inver- 
sion is used to give force and emphasis to an expression : but 
hyperbaton is simply the transf :5::::n oi a word 01 words for the 
sake of the measure; as, "While its song rolls the woods along,'' 
instead of "While its song rolls along the woods." 

There is no better example of an awkward blunder in the use of 
figures than that of the man who prayed that '-the word which had 
been preached might be like a nail driven in a sure place, sending 
1 ownward and its branches upward, spreading itself like a 
fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an 
army with banners!" A wonderful nail, indeed, this would be. 
Lord Cockburn. in his Memoir- i man who, on being as] 

at a public dinner to give a toast, exclaimed: " Here's to the m 
shining on the calm bosom of a lake ! " The man thought, no 
doubt, that he was saying something figurative and fine. Franklin, 
in a toast be gave at a diplomatic dinner at Versailles, made use of 
- an and moon in a very different manner. The British minister 
began with : " George ILL who, like the sun in his meridian, apre 
a luster throughout and enlightens the world. " The French min i 
followed with : " Louis XVI, who, like the moon, sheds his mild and 
benignant rays on and influences the globe." Then our American 
Franklin gave : " George Washington, commander of the American 
army, who, like Joshua of old, commanded the sun and the moon 
to stand still, and they obeyed him ! " Never were simile and meta- 
phor more happily combined. 

I cannot help thinking that, when Cobbett called figures double- 
edged tools, he had in mind the mischief which some of his own 
figures had played with himself on certain occasions. His likenin g 
of Doctor Rush to Doctor Sangrado cost him $5,000; his declara- 
tion that the appointment of Lord Hardwicke to the vice-royalty of 
Ireland was "putting the surgeon's apprentice to bleeding the hos- 
pital patients," cost him £500 ; and his comparison of Castlerea _ 
discipline of British troops to Napoleon's discipline of his con- 
scripts, cost him £1,000 and an imprisonment of two years. Dog- 



and on Figurative Lmguage. 227 

berry found comparisons "odorous;" Cobbett found them very 
expensive and very injurious. Defoe's figures served him even still 
worse ; for his sarcastic irony in ' ' The Shortest Way with the Dis- 
senters" cost him his ears, exposure in the pillory, and the loss 
of his liberty for two years. The remorseless metaphor which 
Brougham applied to Canning, that he was guilty of the ' ' most 
monstrous tergiversation [shuffling, shifting, twisting, turning] for 
office," caused that statesman, it is said, to take to his bed, and 
never to rise from it. 

VERSIFICATION. 

Now comes that mysterious matter, which I promised, at the 
beginning of the book, to give you an account of, versification. 
I said it is a simple matter ; so it is ; and yet many persons look 
upon it as something very complicated, far too difficult for com- 
mon people to learn, and never studied by anybody but poets. 

Verse is of two kinds, rhyme and blank verse. Rhyme con- 
sists of measured lines, every two of which ending with words or 
syllables of a similar sound; blank verse consists of lines with 
measure but no rhyme. Shakespeare's tragedies and Milton's 
Paradise Lost are in blank verse ; Butler's Hudibras and Pope's 
translation of the Iliad — indeed almost all Pope's poems — are in 
rhyme. Blank verse gives the poet much more freedom and ease 
in the expression of his thoughts than rhyme ; consequently our 
noblest poetry is in this form. 

Although there are many kinds of measure or meter, there are 
rarely to be found in English poetry more than four kinds. These 
four are: the iambic, trochaic, anapestic, and dactylic measures; 
all hard names, but meaning easy things. Now, what makes these 
measures easy to learn is, that they go in pairs, and each one in 
each pair is the contrary or the opposite of the other. 

Each line of poetry consists of a certain number of feet — and 
you may have them from one foot up to ten feet — and each foot 
consists of either two or three syllables. A foot in iambic measure 
is called an iambus ; in trochaic measure, a trochee ; in anapestic 
measure, an anapest; in dactylic measure, a dactyl. Now the 
iambus and the trochee are feet of two syllables, and the anapest 
and the dactyl are feet of three syllables. The two syllables of the 
iambus are short-long; as, re-call', at-tend'. The two syllables of 
the trochee are long-short; as, ho'-ly, cy'-press. Therefore you 
see that the one is the opposite of the other. Counting the feet in 
a line of poetry, or pausing after each foot as you go along, is 



228 On Putting Sentences Together, 

called scanning. Now scan me the following verse, and tell me 
whether it is in iambic or trochaic measure : 

The cur [ few tolls | the knell I of part | ing day ; 

The low | ing herd I winds slow | ly o'er | the lea ; 
The plough | man home | ward plods | his wea | ry way, 

And leaves | the world | to dark | ness and | to me. 

Gray's Elegy in a Country Churchyard. 

And tell me if the following stanza is in the same measure • 

Onee up | on a | mid-night | drea-ry, 

While 1 1 pon-der'd | weak and | wea-ry, 

O-ver I many a | quaint and | cu-rious | vol-ume 

Of for I got-ten | lore, 

While 1 1 nod-ded | near-ly | nap-ping, 

Sud-den | ly there I came a I tap-ping, 

As of | some one | gent-ly | rap-ping, 

Rap-ping | at my | cham-ber | door.— Poe's Raven. 

You see that in the first stanza the tone falls always on the second 
syllable, while in the second the tone falls always on the first. 
The first stanza, therefore, is in the iambic measure, and the second 
in the trochaic. 

Now the other two measures are also opposites. Mark the fol- 
lowing verse, and tell me whether it is made up of shot^t-short-long 
feet (anapestic), or long-short-short feet (dactylic) : 

The As-syr | ian came down | like the wolf I on the fold, 
And his co | horts were gleam | ing in pur | pie and gold ; 
And the sheen | o' their spears | was like stars | on the sea 
When the blue | wave rolls night | ly on deep | Ga-li-lee. 

Byron's Destruction of Sennacherib, 

Now observe that the feet in the following verse are the opposite 
or the reverse of the preceding : 

Bird of the | wil-der-ness, 

Blithe-some and | cum-ber-less, 
Sweet be thy | ma-tin o'er | moor-land and | lea 1 

Em-blem of | hap-pi-ness, 

Blest is thy | dwell-ing place- 
On to a | bide in the | des-ert with | thee ! 

The Lark, by James Hogg. 

The first of these last two stanzas is, therefore, in anapestic 
measure, and the second in dactylic. So that the four verses 
represent the iambic, the trochaic, the anapestic, and the dactylic 
measure; and you should learn all four by heart, as a guide in 
enabling you to determine the measure of other poems. Some- 
thing that will help you to remember the dactylic measure is the 
derivation of the word dactyl, which is a Greek word signifying 



and on Figurative Language. 229 

finger. Now look at your forefinger, and see if it does not con- 
sist of one long joint and two short ones (cum'ber-less). So that I 
may say — although it sounds like an Irish bull — that this foot is so 
called because it is like a finger. 

Of all the poems in the English language, nine out of ten are in 
the iambic measure, which is no doubt because that measure is 
most suited to the nature of our language. Poor Lord Surrey — 
who seems to have been a noble, chivalric character, something 
like Sidney; beheaded in the flower of his age by the brutal 
Henry VIII. — was the first to write in this measure. Nearly all 
our dramatic and epic poetry, in fact nearly all our great poems, 
are in this measure. All Shakespeare's blank- verse plays, Milton's 
Paradise Lost, Pope's Homer, Spenser's Faery Queene, Butler's 
Hudibras, and Bryant's Thanatopsis are in iambic measure. There 
is only one thing more to be said, and that is, that you will some- 
times find a mixture of these various measures in one and the same 
poem; but some one measure is, however, usually so predominant 
as to give a character to the verse. Verse means poetry in gen- 
eral, but one single line of poetry is also called a verse. 



230 /Six Lessons 



THE SIX LESSONS. 



LETTEK XXIV. 

SIX LESSONS, INTENDED TO PREVENT STATESMEN FROM USING 
FALSE GRAMMAR, AND FROM WRITING IN AN AWKWARD MANNER. 

Harpenden, Hertfordshire, June 23, 1822. 
My dear James: 

In my first Letter, I observed that it was of the great- 
est importance that statesmen, above all others, should 
be able to write well. It happens, however, but too fre- 
quently, that that which should be, in this case as well as 
in others, is not ; sufficient proof of which you will find 
in the remarks which I am now about to make. The 
Letter to Tierney — a thing which I foresaw would become 
of great and lasting importance; a thing to which I knew 
I should frequently have to recur with satisfaction — I 
wrote on the anniversary of the day on which, in the year 
1810, I was sentenced to be imprisoned for two years, to 
pay a fine of a thousand pounds, and to be held in bonds 
of five thousand pounds for seven years, for having pub- 
licly, and in print, expressed my indignation at the flog- 
ging of English local-militia men in the town of Ely, 
under a guard of German soldiers. I thought of this at 
a time when I saw those events approaching which I w^as 
certain would, by fulfilling my predictions, bring me a 
compensation for the unmerited sufferings and insults 
heaped upon me with so unsparing a hand. For writing 
the present little work, I select the anniversary of a day 
which your excellent conduct makes me regard as amongst 
the most blessed in the calendar. Who, but myself, can 
imagine what I felt when I left you behind me at New 



Introduction. 231 

York! Let this tell my persecutors that you have made 
me more than amends for all the losses, all the fatigue, 
all the dangers, and all the anxieties attending that exile 
of which their baseness and injustice were the cause. 

The bad writing, on which I am about to remark, I do 
not pretend to look on as the cause of the present public 
calamities, or of any part of them ; but it is a proof of a 
deficiency in that sort of talent which appears to me to 
be necessary in men intrusted with great affairs. He who 
writes badly thinks badly. Confusedness in words can 
proceed from nothing but confusedness in the thoughts 
which give rise to them. These things may be of trifling 
importance when the actors move in private life; but 
when the happiness of millions of men is at stake, they 
are of an importance not easily to be described. 

The pieces of writing that I am about to comment on I 
deem bad icriting; and, as you will see, the writing may 
be bad, though there may be no grammatical error in it. 
The best writing is that which is best calculated to secure 
the object of the writer; and the worst, that which is the 
least likely to effect that purpose. But it is not in this 
extended sense of the words that I am now going to con- 
sider any writing. I am merely about to give specimens 
of badly- written papers, as a warning to the statesmen of 
the present day ; and as proofs, in addition to those which 
you have already seen, that we ought not to conclude that 
a man has great abilities merely because he receives great 
sums of the public money. 

The specimens, that I shall give, consist of papers that 
relate to measures and events of the very first importance. 
The first is the speech of the Speaker of the House of 
Commons to the regent, at the close of the first session 
of 1819, during which Mr. Peel's, or the Cash-Payment, 
Bill had been passed; the second is* the answer of the 
regent to that speech ; the first is the work of the House ; 
the second that of the ministry. 



232 Six Lessons. 

In Letter XII, I gave the reasons why we had a right to 
expect perfection in writings of this description. I there 
described the persons to whom the business of writing 
king's speeches belongs. The Speaker of the House of 
Commons is to be taken as the man of the greatest talent 
in that House. He is called the " First Commoner of 
England." Figure to yourself, then, the king on his 
throne, in the House of Lords ; the lords standing in 
their robes; the Commons coming to the bar, with the 
Speaker at their head, gorgeously attired, with the mace 
held beside him; figure this scene to yourself, and you 
wdll almost think it sedition and blasphemy to suppose 
it possible that the speech made to the king, or that his 
majesty's answer, both prepared and written down long 
beforehand, should be anything short of perfection. 
Follow me, then, my dear son, through this Letter ; and 
you will see that we are not to judge of men's talents by 
the dresses they wear, by the offices they fill, or by the 
power they possess. 

After these two papers, I shall take some papers written 
by Lord Castlereagh, by the Duke of Wellington, and by 
the Marquis Wellesley. These are three of those persons 
who have, of late years, made the greatest figure in our 
affairs with foreign nations. The transactions which have 
been committed to their management have been such as 
were hardly ever exceeded in point of magnitude, whether 
we look at the transactions themselves or at their natural 
consequences. How much more fit than other men they 
were to be thus confided in ; how much more fit to have 
the interest and honor of a great nation committed to 
their hands, you will be able to judge when you shall 
have read my remarks on those of their papers to which 
I have here alluded. 

In the making of my comments, I shall insert the several 
papers, a paragraph or two, or more, at a time; and I 
shall number the paragraphs for the purpose of more 
easy reference. 



Speaker's Speech. 233 



LESSON I. 

Remarks on the Speech of the Speaker of the House of 
Commons to the Prince Regent, which Speech was 
made at the close of the first Session of 1819, during 
which Session Reel's Rill teas passed. 

14 May it please your Royal Highness, 

1. " We, his Majesty's faithful Commons of the United Kingdom 
of Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament assembled, attend your 
Royal Highness with our concluding Bill of Supply. 

2. "The subjects which have occupied our attention have been 
more numerous, more various and more important, than are usually 
submitted to the consideration of Parliament in the same Session." 

It is difficult to say what is meant, in Paragraph No. 2, 
by the word various. The Speaker had already said that 
the subjects were more numerous, which was quite enough ; 
for they necessarily differed from each other, or they were 
one and the same ; and, therefore, the word various can 
in this place have no meaning at all, unless it mean that 
the subjects were variegated in themselves, which would 
be only one degree above sheer nonsense. 

Next comes the "'than are,''' without a nominative case. 
Chambermaids, indeed, write in this way, and, in such a 
case, " the dear unintelligible scrawl" is, as the young rake 
says in the play, "ten thousands times more charming" 
than correct writing ; but from a Speaker in his robes we 
might have expected "than those which are usually sub- 
mitted.'' 

And what does the Speaker mean by "in the same 
Session ! " He may mean " in one and the same Session ; " 
but w T hat business had the word same there at all? Could 
he not have said, "during one Session," or "during a 
single Session ? " 

8. " Upon many of these subjects we have been engaged in long 
and unwearied examinations; but such has been the pressure of 



234 Six Lessons. 

other business, and particularly of that which ordinarily belongs 
to a first Session of Parliament — and such the magnitude and 
intricacy of many of those inquiries, that the limits of the present 
Session have not allowed of bringing them to a close." 

There is bad taste, at least, in using the word examin- 
ations in one part of the sentence, and the word inquiries 
in the other part, especially as the pronoun those was 
used in the latter case. The verb "has' 7 agrees in num- 
ber with the noun u pressure; " but the Speaker, notwith- 
standing the aid of his wig, was not able to perceive that 
the same verb did not agree in number with the nouns 
u magnitude and intricacy/ 7 " Such has been the pressure, 
and such have been the magnitude and intricacy. " 

4. "But, Sir, of those measures which we have completed, the 
most prominent, the most important, and, as we trust, in their 
consequences, the most beneficial to the public, are the measures 
which have grown out of the consideration of the present state of 
the country — both in its currency and its finances." 

There is not here any positive error in grammar; but 
there is something a great deal worse ; namely, unintelli- 
gible words. The epithet "prominent " was wholly unnec- 
essary, and only served to inflate the sentence. It would 
have been prudent not to anticipate, in so marked a 
manner, beneficial consequences from Peel's Bill; but 
what are we to understand from the latter part of the 
sentence % Here are measures grouping out of the con- 
sideration of the state of the country in its currency and 
finances. What ! The state of the country in its currency? 
Or is it the consideration in its currency ? And what had 
the word both to do there at all? The Speaker meant 
that the measures had grown out of, or, which would have 
been much more dignified, had been the result of a con- 
sideration of the present state of the country, with regard 
to its currency as well as with regard to its finances. 

5. "Early, Sir, in the present Session, we instituted an inquiry 
into the effects produced on the exchanges with foreign countries, 



Speaker's Speech. 235 

and the state of the circulating medium, by the restriction on 
payments in cash by the Bank. This inquiry was most anxiously 
and most deliberately conducted, and in its result led to the conclusion 
that it was most desirable, quickly, but with due precautions, to 
return to our ancient and healthful state of currency: — That what- 
ever might have been the expediency of the Acts for the suspension 
of payments of cash at the different periods at which they were 
enacted (and doubtless they were expedient), whilst the country was 
involved in the most expensive contest that ever weighed down 
the finances of any country — still that, the necessity for the con- 
tinuance of these Acts having ceased, it became us with as little 
May as possible (avoiding carefully the convulsion of too rapid a 
transition) to return to our ancient system; and that, if at any 
period, and under any circumstances, this return could be effected 
without national inconvenience, it was at the present, when this 
mighty nation, with a proud retrospect of the past, after having 
made the greatest efforts, and achieved the noblest objects, was 
now reposing in a confident, and, as we fondly hope, a well-founded 
expectation of a sound and lasting peace." 

Here, at the beginning of this long and most confused 
paragraph, are two sentences, perfect rivals in all respects ; 
each has 37 words in it; each has three blunders; and 
the one is just as obscure as the other. To "institute" is 
to settle, to fix, to erect, to establish; and not to set about 
or undertake, which was what was done here. If I were 
to tell you that I have instituted an inquiry into the quali- 
ties of the Speaker's speech, you would, though I am your 
father, be almost warranted in calling me an egregious 
coxcomb. But what are we to make of the "and the" 
further on ? Does the Speaker mean that they instituted 
(since he will have it so) an inquiry into the state of the 
circulating medium, or into the effects produced on the 
cumulating medium by the cash suspension? I defy any 
man living to say which of the two is meant by his words. 
And then we come to u by the Bank;" and here the only 
possible meaning of the words is, that the restriction was 
imposed by the Bank; whereas the Speaker means the 
restriction on payments made at the Bank. If at, instead 



236 Six Lessons, 

of by, had happened to drop out of the wig, this part of 
the sentence would have been free from error. 

As to the second sentence in this Paragraph No. 5, I 
may first observe on the incongruity of the Speaker's two 
superlative adverbs. Anxiously means with inquietude; 
and deliberately means coolly, slowly, warily^ and the like. 
The first implies a disturbed, the latter a tranquil, state 
of the mind ; and a mixture of these it was. it appeal's, 
that produced Peel's Bill: this mixture it was which u in 
its results. LED to the conclusion ;" that is to say, the 
result led to the result ; result being conclusion, and con- 
clusion being result. But tautology is, you see, a favorite 
with this son of the Archbishop of Canterbury, more 
proofs of which you have yet to witness. And why must 
the king be compelled to hear the phrase " healthful state 
of the currency," threadbare as it had long before been 
worn by Horner and all his tiibe of coxcombs of the Edin- 
burgh Review? Would not "our ancient currency" have 
answered every purpose 1 And would it not have better 
become the lips of a person in the high station of Speaker 
of the House of Commons ? 

The remaining part of this paragraph is such a mass of 
confusion that one hardly knows where or how to begin 
upon it. The "that" after the colon and the dash seems 
to connect it with what has gone before ; and yet what 
connection is there? Immediately after this "that" 
begins a parenthetical phrase, which is interrupted by a 
parenthesis, and then the parenthetical phrase goes on 
again till it comes to a dash, after which you come to the 
words that join themselves to the first "that.'' These 
words are " still that." Then, on goes the parenthetical 
phrase again till you come to u it became us." Then 
comes more parenthetical matter and another parenthesis; 
and then comes "to return to oar ancient system" Take 
out all the parenthetical matter, and the paragraph will 
stand thus: "That it was desirable to return to our 



Speaker's Speech. 237 

ancient and healthful state of currency : — that — still that, 
it became us to return to our ancient system." 

But only think of saying "whatever might have been 
the expediency of the acts ; " and then to make a paren- 
thesis directly afterwards for the express purpose of posi- 
tively asserting that they "icere expedient"! Only think 
of the necessity for the continuance of the acts having 
ceased,, and of its being becoming in the Parliament to 
return to cash payments as soon as possible, and yet that 
a convulsion was to be apprehended from a too rapid 
transition ; that is to say, from returning to cash payments 
sooner than possible ! 

After this comes a doubt whether the thing can be done 
at all ; for we are told that the Parliament, in its wisdom, 
concluded that, if " at any period this return could be 
effected without national inconvenience, it was at the 
present, 1. And then follows that piece of sublime non- 
sense about the nation's reposing in the fond (that is, 
foolish) hope of, not only a lasting, but also a sound, 
peace. A lasting peace would have been enough for a 
common man ; but the son of an Archbishop must have it 
sound as well as lasting, or else he would not give a far- 
thing for it. 

6. "In considering, Sir, the state of our finances, and in minutely 
comparing our income with our expenditure, it appeared to us that 
the excess of our income was not fairly adequate for the purposes to 
which it was applicable — the gradual reduction of the national debt. 

7. * It appeared to us that a clear available surplus of at least five 
millions ought to be set apart for that object. 

8. "This, Sir, has been effected by the additional imposition of 
three millions of taxes." 

The word "fairly," in Paragraph No. 6, is a redun- 
dancy; it is mere slang. " Adequate for" ought to be 
"adequate to;" and "applicable" is inapplicable to the 
case; for the money was applicable to any pur pose. It 
should have been, "the purpose (and not the purposes) 



238 Six Lessons. 

for which it was intended;" or, "the purpose to which 
it was intended to be applied.'" 

The 7th Paragraph is a heap of redundant Treasury- 
slang. Here we have surplus; that is to say, an over- 
quantity; but this is not enough for the Speaker, who 
must have it clear also ; and not only clear, but available; 
and then he must have it set apart into the bargain! 
Leave out all the words in italics, and "put purpose instead 
of object at the end; and then you have something like 
common sense as to the words, but still foolish enough as 
to the political view of the matter. 

Even the 8th Paragraph, a simple sentence of fourteen 
words, could not be free from fault. What does the 
Speaker mean by an "additional imposition " ! Did he 
imagine that the king would be fool enough to believe 
that the Parliament had imposed three millions of taxes 
without making an addition to former impositions? How 
was the imposition to be other than "additional?" Why, 
therefore, cram in this word ! 

9. ''Sir, in adopting this course, his Majesty's faithful Commons 
did not conceal from themselves that they were calling upon the 
nation for a great exertion ; but well knowing that honor, and char- 
acter, and independence have at all times been the first and dearest 
objects of the hearts of Englishmen, ire felt assured that there was 
no difficulty that the country could not encounter, and no pressure 
to which she would not willingly and cheerfully submit, to enable 
her to maintain, pure and unimpaired, that which has never yet been 
shaken or sullied — her public credit and her national good faith." 

This is a sentence which might challenge the world! 
Here is, in a small compass, almost every fault that writing 
can have. The phrase "conceal from themselves" is an 
importation from France, and from one of the worst manu- 
factories too. What is national " honor " but national 
"character?" In what do they differ"? And what had 
"independence" to do in a case where the subject was the 
means of paying a debt ! Here are three things named as 



Speaker's Speech. 239 

the " first " object of Englishmen's hearts. Which was the 
"first" of the three? Or were they the first three? To 
"feel assured " is another French phrase. In the former 
part of the sentence, the Parliament are a they; in the 
latter part they are a ice. But it is the figures of rhetoric 
which are the great beauties here. First it is English- 
men who have such a high sense of honor and character 
and independence. Next it is the country. And next the 
country becomes a she; and in her character of female 
will submit to any "pressure" to enable her to "main- 
tain " her ]?u?*ity; though scarcely anybody but the sons 
of Archbishops ever talk about maintaining purity, most 
people thinking that, in such a case, preserving is better. 
Hare, however, we have pure and unimpaired. Now, pure 
applies to things liable to receive stains and adulterations; 
unimpaired^ to things liable to be undermined, dilapi- 
dated, demolished, or ivorn out. So the Speaker, in order 
to make sure of his mark, takes them both, and says that 
the thing which he is about to name, " has never yet been 
shaken or sullied"! But what is this fine thing after all? 
Gad! there are two things; namely, "public credit and 
national good faith/' So that, leaving the word good to 
go to the long account of redundancy, here is another 
instance of vulgarly-false grammar; for the two nouns, 
joined by the conjunction, require the verb have instead 
of has. 

10. ' k Thus, Sir, I have endeavoured, shortly, and I am aware how 
imperfectly, to notice the various duties which have devolved upon 
us, in one of the longest and most arduous sessions in the records 
of Parliament." 

11. "The Bill, Sir, which it is my duty to present to your Royal 
Highness, is entitled, 4 An Act for applying certain monies therein 
mentioned for the Service of the } r ear 1819, and for further appro- 
priating the supplies granted in this Session of Parliament.' To 
which, with all humility, we pray his majesty's royal assent." 

Even here, in these common-place sentences, there must 
be something stupidly illiterate. The Speaker does not 



240 Six Lessons. 

mean that his "endeavor" was "shortly" made, or made 
in a short manner^ but that his notice was made in a 
short manner; and, therefore, it ought to have been, "to 
notice shortly " if shortly it must be; yet, surely phrase- 
ology less grovelling might have been used on such an 
occasion. "In the longest session," and "in the records 
of Parliament," are colloquial, low and incorrect into the 
bargain ; and as for " monies " in the last paragraph, the 
very sound of the word sends the mind to 'Change Alley, 
and conjures up before it all the noisy herd of Bulls and 
Bears. 

There is, indeed, one phrase in this whole Speech (that 
in which the Speaker acknowledges the imperfectness of 
the manner in which he has performed his task) which 
would receive our approbation; but the tenor of the 
speech, the at once flippant and pompous tone of it, the 
self-conceit that is manifest from the beginning to the end, 
forbid us to give him credit for sincerity when he con- 
fesses his deficiencies, and tell us that the confession is 
one of those clumsy traps so often used with the hope of 
catching unmerited applause. 



LESSON II. 

Remarks on the Speech which the Prince Regent made to 
the Parliament on the occasion when the above Speech 
of the Speaker was made. 

1 ' My Lords a.nd Gentlemen : 

12. ' It is with great regret that I am again obliged to announce 
to you the continuance of his Majesty's lamented indisposition. 

13. " I cannot close this session of Parliament without expressing 
the satisfaction that I have derived from the zeal and assiduity 
with which you have applied yourselves to the several important 
objects which have come under your consideration. 

14. " Your patient and laborious investigation of the state of the 



King's Speech. 241 

circulation and currency of the kingdom demands my warmest 
acknowledgment ; and I entertain a confident expectation that the 
measures adopted, as the result of this inquiry, will be productive 
of the most beneficial consequences. " 

The phrase pointed out by italics in the 12th Paragraph 
is ambiguous; and, as it is wholly superfluous, it has no 
business there. The 13th Paragraph (for a wonder!) is 
free from fault ; but, in the 14th, why does the king make 
tioo of the " circulation and currency " ? He means, doubt- 
less, to speak of the thing, or things, in use as money. 
This was the currency; and what, then, was the "circu- 
lation " ? It is not only useless to employ words in this 
way ; it is a great deal worse ; for it creates a confusion 
of ideas in the mind of the reader. 

"Investigation and inquiry" come nearly to each other 
in meaning ; but when the word "this," which had a direct 
application to what has gone before, was used, the word 
investigation ought to have followed it, and not the word 
inquiry; it being always a mark of great affectation and 
of false taste, when pains are taken to seek for synonymous 
words in order to avoid a repetition of sound. The device 
is seen through, and the littleness of mind exposed. 

The fine word "adopted" is not nearly so good as the 
plain word taken would have been. The Parliament did 
not adopt the measures in question ; they were their own; 
of their own invention ; and, if I were here writing re- 
marks on the measures, instead of remarks on the lan- 
guage in which they were spoken of, we might have a 
hearty laugh at the "confident expectation" which the 
king entertained of the "most beneficial consequences " of 
those measures, which were certainly the most foolish 
and mischievous ever taken by any Parliament, or by any 
legislative assembly, in the world. 

" Gentlemen of the House of Commons: 

15. "I thank you for the supplies which you have granted for 
the service of the present year. 
11 



242 Six Lessons. 

16. "I sincerely regret that the necessity should have existed of 
making any additions to the burthens of the people ; but I antici- 
pate the most important permanent advantages from the effort 
which you have thus made for meeting at once all the financial 
difficulties of the country; and I derive much satisfaction from the 
belief that the means which you have devised for this purpose arc 
calculated to press as lightly on all classes of the community as 
could be expected when so great an effort was to be made." 

Nobody, I presume, but kings say an " effort for meet- 
ing." Others say that they make an effort to meet. And 
nobody, that I ever heard of before, except bill-brokers, 
talks about meeting money demands. One cannot help 
admiring the satisfaction, nay, the "much satisfaction" 
that the king derived from the belief that the new taxes 
would press as lightly as possible on all classes of the 
community. I do not like to call this vulgar nonsense, 
because, though written by the ministers, it is spoken by 
the king. But, ichat is it? The additional load must 
fall upon somebody/ upon some class or classes; and 
where, then, was the sense of expressing " much satisfac- 
tion''' that they would fall lightly on all classes? The 
words " as possible ," which come after likely, do nothing 
more than make an addition to the confusion of ideas. 

1 ' My Loeds and Gentlemen : 

17. "I continue to receive from foreign powers the strongest 
assurances of their friendly disposition towards this country. 

18. "I have observed with great concern the attempts which 
have recently been made in some of the manufacturing districts to 
take advantage of circumstances of local distress, to excite a spirit 
of disaffection to the institutions and government of the country. 
No object can be nearer my heart than to promote the welfare and 
prosperity of all classes of his majesty's subjects ; but this cannot 
be effected without the maintenance of public order and tran- 
quillity. 

18. "You may rely, therefore, upon my firm determination to 
employ, for this purpose, the powers entrusted to me by law ; and 
I have no doubt that, on your return to your several counties, you 
will use your utmost endeavors, in co-operating with the magis- 



King's Speech. 243 

tracy, to defeat the machinations of those whose projects, if suc- 
cessful, could only aggravate the evils which it prof 'essed to remedy; 
and who, under the pretence of Reform, have really no other object 
but the subversion of our happy Constitution." 

Weak minds, feeble writers and speakers, delight in 
superlatives. They have big sound in them, and give the 
appearance of force; but they very often betray those 
who use them into absurdities. The king, as in Paragraph 
No. 17, might continue to receive strong assurances ; but 
how could he receive " the strongest " more than once ? 

In the 18th Paragraph we have "welfare and pros- 
yerity." I, for my part, shall be content with either (the 
two being the same thing), and if I find, from the acts of 
the government, reason to believe that one is really sought 
for, I shall care little about the other. 

I am, however, I must confess, not greatly encouraged 
to hope for this, when I immediately afterwards hear of a 
"firm determination " to employ "powers" the nature of 
which is but too well understood. "Determination " can, 
in grammar, receive no additional force from having firm 
placed before it ; but, in political interpretation, the use 
of this word cannot fail to be looked upon as evincing a 
little more of eagerness than one could wish to see ap- 
parent in such a case. 

In these speeches, nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs 
generally go, like crows and ravens, in pairs. Hence we 
have, in the 18th Paragraph, " the institutions and gov- 
ernment" of the country. Now, though there may be 
institutions of the country, which do not form a part of 
its government; the government is, at any rate, amongst 
the country's institutions. If every institution do not 
form a part of the government, the government certainly 
forms a part of the institutions. But as the old woman 
said by her goose and gander, these words have been a 
couple for so many, many years, that it would be a sin to 
part them just at the last. 



'24:4: Six Lessons. 

The gross grammatical errors in the latter part of the 
last paragraph, where the singular pronoun it represents 
the plural noun projects, and the verb profess is in the 
p>ast instead of the p> resen t time, one can account for only 
on the supposition that the idea of Reform had scared all 
the powers of thought from the minds of the writers. 
This unhappy absence of intellect seems to have con- 
tinued to the end of the piece; for here we have "no 
other object but" instead of no other object than; and 
the word " really " put into the mouth of a king, and on 
such an occasion, is something so very low that we can 
hardly credit our eyes when we behold it. 



INTKODUCTION 

To the Four Lessons on the productions of Lord Castle- 
reagh, the Luke of Wellington, the Marquis Wellesley, 
and the JBishop of Winchester. 

Prom the literary productions of Speakers and Minis- 
ters, I come to those of Ambassadors, Secretaries of State, 
Viceroys, and Bishops. In these persons, even more fully 
perhaps than in the former, we are entitled to expect 
proofs of great capacity \ as writers. I shall give you 
specimens from the writings of four persons of this de- 
scription, and these four, men who have been intrusted 
with the management of affairs as important as any that 
the king of this country ever had to commit to the hands 
of his servants : I mean Lord Castlereagh, the Lhike of 
Wellington, the Marquis Wellesley, and the Bishop of 
Winchester/ the first of whom has been called the greatest 
statesman, the second the greatest captain, the third the 
greatest viceroy, the fourth the greatest tutor, of the age. 

The passages which I shall first select from the writings 
of these persons are contained in state papers relating to 
the Museums at Bar is. 



Introduction, Etc. 245 

And here, in order that you may be better able to judge 
of the writings themselves, I ought to explain to you the 
nature of the matters to which they relate, and the cir- 
cumstances under which they were written. The Museums 
at Paris contained, in the year 1815, when the King of 
France was escorted back to that city by the armies of 
the Allies, a great many statues and pictures, which Na- 
poleon had, in his divers conquests and invasions, taken 
from the collections of other countries, and carried to 
France. "When, therefore, the Allies had, by their armies, 
possession of Paris, at the time just mentioned, they rifled 
these Museums, and took from them what had, or what 
they asserted had, belonged to the Allies respectively. 
The French contended that this was unjust, and that it 
was an act of pillage. They said, that, in 1814, when the 
Allies were also in possession of the capital of France, 
they put forward no claim to the things in question, 
which were, to all intents and purposes, military booty, 
or prize ; and that for the Allies to make this claim now, 
was not only contrary to their own precedent of 1814, 
but that it was to assume the character of enemies of 
France, directly in the teeth of their own repeated declar- 
ations, in which they had called themselves friends and 
even Allies of France ; aad in direct, violation of their 
solemn promises to commit against the French nation no 
act of hostility, and to treat it, in all respects, as a friend. 
The Allies had now, however, the power in their hands ; 
and the result was the stripping of the Museums. 

To characterize this act committed by those who entered 
France under the name of the Allies of the king and of 
the great body of his people, and who took possession of 
Paris in virtue of a convention which stipulated for the 
security of all public property; to characterize such an 
act is unnecessary; but we cannot help lamenting that 
the Ministers of England' were open abettors, if not orig- 
inal instigators, in this memorable transaction, which, of 



246 Six Lessons. 

all the transactions of that time, seems to have created 
the greatest portion of rancor in the minds of the people 
of France. 

That the English Ministers were the instigators appears 
pretty clearly from the seizure (which was by force of 
arms) having been immediately preceded by a paper 
(called a note) delivered by Lord Castlereagh in the name 
of the Prince Kegent to the Ambassadors of the Allies, 
which paper was dated 11th Sept., 1815, and from which 
paper I am now about to give you a specimen of the 
writing of this Secretary of State. 



LESSON III. 

Remarks on J^ord Castlereagh' s Note of the Wth Sep- 
tember, 1815, on the subject of the Museums at Paris. 

This Note sets out by saying, that representations, on 
the subject of the Statues and Pictures, have been laid 
before the Ambassadors of the Allies, and that the writer 
had received the commands of the Prince Regent to 
submit, for the consideration of the Allies, that which 
follows. After some further tnatter, amongst which we 
find this " greatest statesman " tuning of " the indigen- 
cies " (instead of indulgences) to which the French had a 
right "to aspire" (instead of to hope for); after saying 
that the purity of the friendship of the Allies had been 
"proved beyond a question " by their last year's conduct, 
and " still more" that is to say, farther than beyond, by 
their this year's conduct; after talking about the " sub- 
stantial integrity " of France, and thereby meaning that 
she was to be despoiled of only a part of her dominions; 
after talking about " combining" this "integrity with such 
an adequate system of temporary precaution as may sat- 
isfy what the Allies owe to the security of their own 



Lord CasUerea>;Ks Note. 247 

subjects;" after all this, and a great deal more of the 
same description, we come to the paragraphs that I am 
now going to remark on. Observe, I continue the num- 
bering of the paragraphs, as if the whole of the papers on 
which I am commenting formed but one piece of writing. 

20. "Upon what principle can France, at the close of such a 
war, expect to sit down with the same extent of possessions which 
she held before the Revolution, and desire, at the same time, to 
retain the ornamental spoils of all other countries? Is it that there 
can exist a doubt of the issue of the contest, or of the power of the 
Allies to effectuate what justice and policy require ? If not, upon 
what principle deprive France of her late territorial acquisitions, 
and preserve to her the spoliations appertaining to those territories 
which all modern conquerers have invariably respected, as insepar- 
able from the country to which they belonged ? 

21. "The Allied Sovereigns have perhaps something to atone for 
to Europe, in consequence of the course pursued by them, when 
at Paris, during the last year. It is true, they never did so far 
make themselves parties in the criminality of this mass of plunder 
as to sanction it by any stipulation in their treaties ; such a recog- 
nition has been on their part uniformly refused • but they certainly 
did use their influence to repress at that moment any agitation of. 
their claims, in the hope that France, not less subdued by their 
generosity than by their arms, might be disposed to preserve 
inviolate a peace which had been studiously framed to serve as a 
bond of reconciliation between the nation and the king. They 
had also reason to expect that his Majesty would be advised volun- 
tarily to restore a considerable proportion, at least, of these spoils, 
to their lawful owners. 

22. "But the question is a very different one now, and to pursue 
the same course, under circumstances so essentially altered, would 
be, in the judgment of the Prince Regent, equally unwise towards 
France, and unjust towards our Allies, who have a direct interest 
in this question. 

23. "His Royal Highness, in stating this opinion, feels it neces- 
sary to guard against the possibility of misrepresentation. 

24. "Whilst he deems it to be the duty of the Allied Sovereigns 
not only not to obstruct, but facilitate, upon the present occasion, 
the return of these objects to the places from whence they were torn, 
it seems not less consistent with their delicacy not to suffer the 
position of their armies in France, or the removal of these works 



24fi 

from the Louvre, to become the means, either directly or indire 
of bringing within their own dominions a single article which did 
not of right, at the period of their conquest, belong either to their 
respective family collections, or to the countries over which 
now actually reign. 

35. ■• Whoever v^ue Hie Prince Regent might a::ach tn such 
exquisite specimens of the fine arts, if otherwise acquired, he has 
no wish to become possessed of them at the expense of France, or 
rather of the countries to which they of a right belong, more espe- 
cially by following up a principle in wear which he considers 
reproach to the nation by which it has been adopted, and so far 
from wishing to take advantage of the occasion to purchase from 
the rightful owners any articles they might, from pecuniary con- 
siderations, be disposed to part with, his Royal Highness would, on 
the contrary, be disposed rather to afford the means of replacing 
them in those very temples and galleries of which they were so 
long the ornaments. 

26. "Were it possible that his Royal Highnesses sentiments 
towards the person and cause of Louis XV ill. could be brought 
into doubt, or that the position of his Most Christian Majesty was 
likely to be injured in the eyes of his own people, the Prince Regent 
would not come to this conclusion without the most painful re- 
luctance ; but. on the contrary, his Royal Highness believes that 
his Majesty will rise in the love and respect of his own sub; 
in proportion as he separates himself from these remembrances of 
revolutionary warfare. These spoils, which impede a moral recon- 
ciliation between France and the countries she has invaded, are 
not necessary to record the exploits of her armies, which, notwith- 
standing the cause in which they were achieved, must ever make 
the arms of the nation respected abroad. But whilst these objects 
remain at Paris, constituting as it were the title-deeds of the coun- 
tries which have been given up. the sentiments of reuniting these 
countries again to France will never be alto ± ; nor 

will the genius of the French people ever completely associate itself 
with the more limited existence assigned to the nation under the 
Bourbons." 

I shall say nothing of the logic of this passage; and 
I ~ould fain pass over the real and poorly-disgu: 
motive of the proceeding; but this must strike every 
observer. 

It is the mere tcriting, which, at present, is to be the 



Lord CastlereaghPs Note. 249 

principal object of our attention. To be sure, the senti- 
ments, the very thoughts, in Paragraphs 24 and 25, which 
speak the soul, as they are conveyed in the language, of 
the sedentary and circumspect keeper of a huckster's 
stand, or the more sturdy perambulating bearer of a mis- 
cellaneous pack, do, with voice almost imperious, demand 
a portion of our notice ; while, with equal force, a similar 
claim is urged by the suspicions in the former of these 
paragraphs, and the protestations in the latter, which 
present to the nations of Europe, and especially to the 
French nation, such a captivating picture of English 
frankness and sincerity ! 

But let us come to the viriting; and here, in Paragraph 
20, we have spoliations appertaining to territories, though 
spoliation means the act of despoiling, and never does 
or can mean the thing of which one has been despoiled ; 
and next, we have the word which, relating to spoliation, 
and then the subsequent part of the sentence tells us that 
spoliations have invariably been respected. 

In the 21st Paragraph, does the it relate to criminality 
or to mass of plunder? and what is meant by a sanction 
given to either? Could the writer suppose it possible 
that it was necessary to tell the Allies, themselves, that 
they had not sanctioned such things? And here, if we 
may, for a moment, speak of the logic of our " greatest 
statesman," the Allies did sanctio?i, not criminality, not 
a mass of plunder, but the quiet possessioyi of the speci- 
mens of art, by leaving, in 1814, that possession as they 
found it. At the close of this paragraph, we have a pro- 
portion, instead of apart, an error common enough with 
country fellows when they begin to talk fine, but one 
that surely ought to be absent from the most stately of 
the productions of a Secretary of State. 

"Unwise towards France, and unjust towards the 
Allies," and "equally" too, is as pretty a specimen of 
\?hat is called twattle as you will find; while " the return " 
11* 



250 Six £esso?is. 

of these "objects" the not purloining of a "single articled 
the not wishing to "take advantage" and to "purchase 
any of the articles that the owners might wish to part 
with" form as fine an instance of the powers of the plume 
de crasse, or pen of mud, as you will be able to hunt out 
of the history of a whole years proceedings at the Police 
Offices. 

But, in Paragraph 24, we have " their conquest." The 
conquest of whom or what? That of the Allies, that of 
their dominions, or that of the " objects " ? It is impossi- 
ble to answer, except by guess ; but it comes out, at any 
rate, that there was a conquest; and this "greatest 
statesman " might have perceived that this one word was 
a complete answer to all his assertions about plunder and 
spoliation ; for that which is conquered is held of right; 
and the only want of right in the Allies, forcibly to take 
these " articles, 1 ' arose from their having entered France 
as Allies of the King of France, and not as enemies and 
conquerers. 

And what, in Paragraph 25, is meant by "following up 
a principle in war"? The phrase, "follow up a prin- 
ciple," is low as the dirt ; it is chit-chat, and very unfit to 
be used in a writing of this sort. But, as to the sense ; 
how could the regent, even if he had purchased the pic- 
tures, be said to follow up a principle "in war''"? The 
meaning, doubtless, was that the regent had no wish to 
become possessed of these things at the expense of 
France, or, rather, at the expense of the countries 
to which they belonged, especially as he could not 
thus gratify his taste for the arts without acting 
upon a principle which the French had acted on in 
war. This meaning might, indeed, be supposed to be 
contained in the above phrase of Lord Castlereagh; 
but in a writing of this kind, ought anything be left to 
supposition? 

The 26th Paragraph is aa assemblage of all that is 



Lord CastlereagK s Note. 251 

incorrect, low, and ludicrous. The "was" after Christian 
Majesty ought to be could be, that is, "were it possible 
that his position could be likely to be injured ; " and not 
"were it possible that his position was likely to be in- 
jured," which is downright nonsense. And then only 
think of an injured position; and of the king's position 
being injured "in the eyes" of his people! "But, on the 
contrary." On the contrary of what? Look back, and 
see if it be possible to answer this question. Next comes 
the intolerable fustian of the king's " separating himself 
from remembrances;" and from this flight, down the 
" greatest statesman " pitches, robs the attorney's office, 
and calls the statues and pictures "title deeds, as it 
were;" and this "as it were" is, perhaps, the choicest 
phrase of the whole passage. But, in conclusion (for it i3 
time to have done with it), what do you say to " the senti- 
ments of re-uniting the countries to France"? And 
what do you say, then, to the "genius" (that is, the dis- 
position) " of the French people associating itself with 
the limited existence assigned to the nation under the 
Bourbons"? What do you say of the man who could 
make use of these words, when his meaning was, " that, 
as long as these statues and pictures remained to remind 
the French people of the late extent of the dominions of 
France, their minds would not be completely reconciled 
to those more narrow limits, which had now been pre- 
scribed to her"? What do you say of the man who, 
having this plain proposition to state, could talk of the 
genius of the people associating itself with the more 
limited existence of the nation, the nation being the 
people; and therefore his meaning, if there can be any 
sense in the words, being, that the people as a nation had, 
under the Bourbons, had their existence, or length of life, 
abridged? What do you say, what can you say of such 
a man, but that nature might have made him for a valet, 
for a strolling player, and possibly for an auctioneer ; but 



252 Six Lessons. 

never for a Secretary of State ! Yet this man was edu- 
cated at the University of Cambridge* 



LESSON IV. 

Remarks on a Dispatch of the Duke of Wellington 
(called the greatest Captain of the age) relative to the 
Museums at Paris. 

Having, as far as relates to the Museums, taken a suffi- 
cient view of the writing of the greatest Statesman of the 
age, I now come to that of the "greatest Captain." The 
writing that I am now about to notice relates to the same 
subject. The Captain was one of the Commanders at 
Paris, at the time above spoken of, and it is in that capa- 
city that he writes. But we ought to observe, here, that 
he is not only a great Captain, but a great Ambassador 
also; and that he was Ambassador at the Congress of 
Vienna just before the time we are speaking of ; and that 
he was formerly Secretary of State for Ireland. 

The paper, from which I am about to make a quotation, 
is a " dispatch " from the " greatest Captain " to Lord 
Castlereagh, dated at Paris, 23rd September, 1815, soon 
after the museums had been rifled. 

I shall not take up much of your time with the per- 
formance of this gentleman ; a short specimen will suffice ; 

* This Lesson was written in June, 1822. On the 12th of August, 
1822, this same Lord Castlereagh (being still Secretary of State) 
killed himself at North Cray, in Kent, by cutting his throat. A 
Coroner's Jury pronounced him to have heen*insane; and, which is 
very curious, a letter from the Duke of Wellington was produced to 
prove that the deceased had been insane for some time. Though, 
mind, he had been for some time, and was lolien he cut his throat, 
actually entrusted with the care and powers of the two other Secre- 
taries' offices (they being absent), as well as those of the office of 
Foreign Affairs.' 



The Duke of Wellington. 253 

and that shall consist of the first three paragraphs of his 
u dispatch." 

"My dear Loed : 

27. " There has been a good deal of discussion, here lately respect- 
ing the measures which I have been under the necessity of adopt- 
ing, in order to get for the King of the Netherlands his pictures, 
etc. , from the museums ; and lest these reports should reach the 
Prince Regent, I wish to trouble you, for his Royal Highness's in- 
formation, with the following statement of what has passed. 

28. " Shortly after the arrival of the sovereigns at Paris, the 
minister of the King of the Netherlands claimed the pictures, etc., 
belonging to his sovereign, equally with those of other powers; and, 
as far as I could learn, never could get any satisfactory reply from 
the French government. After several conversations with me, he 
addressed your lordship an official note, which was iaid before the 
ministers of the allied sovereigns, assembled in conference; and 
the subject was taken into consideration repeatedly, with a view 
to discover a mode of doing justice to the claimants of the speci- 
mens of the arts in the museums, without injuring the feelings of 
the King of France. In the meantime the Prussians had obtained 
from his majesty not only all the really Prussian pictures, but 
those belonging to the Prussian territories on the left of the Rhine, 
and the pictures, etc., belonging to all the allies of his Prussian 
majesty; and the subject pressed for an early decision; and your 
lordship wrote your note of the 11th instant, in which it was fully 
discussed. 

29. "The ministers of the King of the Netherlands still having 
no satisfactory answer from the French government, appealed to 
me, as the general-in-chief of the army of the King of the Nether- 
lands, to know wliether Iliad any objection to employ his majesty's 
troops to obtain possession of what was his undoubted property. 
I referred this application again to the ministers of the allied 
courts, and no objection having been stated, I considered it my duty 
to take the necessary measures to obtain what zoos his right." 

The great characteristic of this writing (if writing it 
ought to be called) is the thorough-paced vulgarity of it. 
There is a meanness of manner as well as of expression, 
and, indeed, a suitableness to the subject much too 
natural in all its appearances, to have been the effect 
of art. 



254: Six JOessons. 

The writer, though addressing a minister of state, and 
writing matter to be laid before a sovereign, begins ex- 
actly in the manner of a quidnunc talking to another that 
he has just met in the street. " There has been a good 
deal of discussion" (that is to say, talk) "here;" that is 
to say, at Paris, Castlereagh being, at the time, in London. 
The phrase "to get for" is so very dignified that it could 
have come only from a great man, and could have been 
inspired by nothing short of the consciousness of being 
"the ally of all the nations of Europe" as the writer 
calls himself in another part of this famous "dispatch." 

But what are " these reports" of which the great Cap- 
tain speaks in the latter part of this paragraph ? He had 
spoken of no reports before. He had mentioned "dis- 
cussion" and a "good deal" of it; but had said not a 
word about reports; and these reports pop out upon us 
like "these six men in buckram," in FalstafFs narrative 
to the Prince. 

The Captain's " wishing to trouble " Lord Castlereagh, 
" for the regent's information" closes this paragraph in 
a very suitable manner, and prepares the mind for the 
next, where the regent would find trouble enough, if he 
were compelled to find out the English of it. The Dutch 
minister "claimed the pictures belonging to his sovereign, 
equally with those of other powers." "What! did this 
Dutchman claim the whole : those belonging to the Dutch 
sovereign and those belonging to all the other powers 
besides ? This, to be sure, would have been in the true 
Dutch style; but this could hardly be the fact. If it 
were, no wonder that the duke had learned that the 
minister "never could get any satisfactory reply;" for 
it must have been a deal indeed that would have satisfied 
him. 

The phrase "he addressed your lordship an official 
note " is in the counting-house style ; and then to say to 
Lord Castlereagh, " your lordship wrote your note of the 



The Duke of Wellington. 255 

11th of September,*' was so necessary, lest the latter 
should imagine that somebody else had written the note ! 
Nor are the four ands in this paragraph to be overlooked; 
for never was this poor conjunction so worked before, 
except, perhaps, in some narrative of a little girl to her 
mother. 

The narrative is, in the last-quoted paragraph, continued 
with unrelaxed spirit. The Dutch minister can still ob- 
tain no satisfactory answer ; he asks the duke whether he 
has any objection to use force, and asserts, at the same 
time, that the goods in question are his master's "un- 
doubted property " Upon this the duke applies to the 
other ministers, and, " no objection having been stated*' 
he considers it his duty to obtain " what teas his right f 
that is to say, the Dutch king's right. 

Never was there surely a parcel of words before put 
together by anybody in so clumsy a manner. In a sub- 
sequent part of the "dispatch^ we have this: "1 added, 
that I had no instructions regarding the museum, nor no 
grounds on which to form a judgment." In another place 
we have "the King of the Netherlands pictures." In 
another place we have "that the property should be 
returned to their rightful owners." 

But, to bestow criticism on such a shocking abuse of 
letters is to disgrace it ; and nothing can apologize for 
what I have done but the existence of a general knowl- 
edge of the fact that the miserable stuff that I have 
quoted, and on which I have been remarking, proceeded 
from the pen of a man who has, on many occasions, had 
some of the most important of the nation's affairs com- 
mitted to his management. There is in the nonsense of 
Castlereagh a frivolity and a foppery that give it a sort 
of liveliness, and that now and then elicit a smile ; but in 
the productions of his correspondent there is nothing to 
relieve ; all is vulgar, all clumsy, all dull, all torpid inanity. 



256 Six Lessons. 



LESSON V. 

Remarks o?i a Note presented by Lord Castlereagh to the 
Ambassadors of the Allies, at Paris, in July, 1815, 
relative to the slave trade. 

30. " Viscount Castlekeagh, his Britannic Majesty's principal 
Secretary of State, etc., in reference to the communication he has 
made to the conference of the orders addressed to the admiralty to 
suspend all hostilities against the coast of France, observes, that 
there is reason to foresee that French ship-owners might be induced 
to renew the slave trade, under the supposition of the peremptory 
and total abolition decreed by Napoleon Bonaparte having ceased 
with his power; that, nevertheless, great and powerful considera- 
tions, arising from motives of humanity and even regard for the 
king's authority, require that no time should be lost to maintain in 
France the entire and immediate abolition of the traffic in slaves ; 
that if, at the time of the Treaty of Paris, the king's administration 
could wish a final but gradual stop should be put to this trade, in 
the space of five years, for the purpose of affording the king the 
gratification of having consulted, as much as possible, the interests 
of the French proprietors in the colonies, now, that the absolute 
prohibition has been ordained, the question assumes entirely a dif- 
ferent shape, for if the king were to revoke the said prohibition, 
he would give himself the disadvantage of authorizing, in the interior 
of France, the reproach which more than once has been thrown out 
against his former government, of countenancing reactions, and, 
at the same time, justifying, out of France, and particularly in 
England, the belief of a systematic opposition to liberal ideas; that 
accordingly the time seems to have arrived when the Allies cannot 
hesitate formally to give weight in France to the immediate and 
entire prohibition of the slave trade, a prohibition, the necessity of 
which has been acknowledged, in principle, in the transactions of 
the Congress at Vienna." 

Now, I put this question to you : Do you understand 
what this great statesman means? Read the note three 
times over, and then say whether you understand ichat 
he wants. You may guess; but you can go little further. 
Here is a whole mass of grammatical errors ; but it is the 



Lord CastlereagKs Note. 257 

obscurity, the unintelligibleness of the note, that I think 
constitutes its greatest fault. One way of proving the 
badness of this writing is to express the meaning of the 
writer in a clear manner ; thus : 

"Lord Castlereagh observes that there is reason to 
apprehend that the French ship-owners may be induced 
to renew the slave trade, from a supposition that the 
total abolition, recently decreed by Napoleon, has been 
nullified by the cessation of his authority ; that motives 
of humanity, as well as a desire to promote the establish- 
ment of the king's authority, suggest that no time should 
be lost in taking efficient measures to maintain the decree 
of abolition ; that at the time of the Treaty of Paris, the 
king's ministers wished to abolish this trade, but, in order 
that the king might, as much as possible, consult the 
interests of the colonial proprietors, those ministers 
wished the object to be accomplished by degrees during 
the space of five years ; that now, however, when the 
abolition has been actually decreed, the matter assumes 
an entirely different shape, seeing that it is not now an 
abolition, but the refraining from revoking an abolition, 
that is proposed to be suggested to the king ; that, if the 
king were to do this, he would warrant amongst his own 
people the injurious imputation, more than once brought 
against his former government, of countenancing the 
work of undoing and overtui^ning, and would, at the same 
time, confirm foreign nations, and particularly the English, 
in the belief that he had adopted a systematic opposition 
to liberal principles and views ; that, therefore, the inter- 
ests of the king not less than those of humanity seem to 
call upon the Allies to give, formally and without delay, 
the weight of their influence in favor, as far as relates to 
France, of an entire and immediate abolition of the slave 
trade, an abolition, the necessity of which has, in principle 
at least, been acknowledged in the transactions of the 
Congress of Vienna." 



258 Six Lessons. 

Now, as to the several faulty expressions in the note of 
Castlereagh, though I have made great use of italics, I 
have not pointed out one-half of the faults. "Whoever 
before heard of a reason to foresee a thing? He meant 
reason to believe that the thing would take place, and as 
it was a thing to be wished not to take place, to apprehend 
was the word ; because to apprehend means to think of 
with some degree of fear. Wishing to-morrow to be a 
fine day, what would you think of me if I were to say 
that I had reason to foresee that it would rain? The 
might is clearly wrong. If the abolition were total, what 
had peremptory to do there? Could it be more than 
total? The nevertheless had no business there. He was 
about to give reasons why the abolition decree ought to 
be confirmed ; but he had stated no reasons given by any- 
body why it should not. To lose no time to maintain; 
and then the in France, and then the immediate; alto- 
gether there is such a mass of confusion that one cannot 
describe it. " To maintain in France" would lead one 
to suppose that there was, or had been, a slave trade in 
France. The next part, beginning with "that if" sets 
all criticism at defiance. Look at the verbs could wish, 
and should be/ Look at of having. Then comes prohi- 
bition for abolition, two very different things. To assume 
entirely a different shape is very different from to assume 
an entirely different shape. The latter is meant and the 
former is said. Then what does the for do there? WTiat 
consequence is he coming to? How was he going to 
show that the shape was different ? He attempts to show 
no such thing; but falls to work to foretell the evils 
which will fall on the King of France if he revoke Na- 
poleon's decree. And here, Goddess of Grub-street, do 
hear him talking of the King of France giving himself 
the disadvantage of authorizing reproaches! If the 
king's conduct would justify people in believing ill of 
him, why should it justify the English in particular? 



Lord CastlereagK's Note. 259 

They might, indeed, be more ready to believe ill of him; 
but it could not be more just in them than in others. 
An opposition to ideas is a pretty idea enough ; and so 
is the giving of iveight in France to an immediate pro- 
hibition ! 

Never was there, surely, such a piece of writing seen 
before ! Fifty years hence, no man who should read it 
would be able to ascertain its meaning. I am able to 
pick it out, because, and only because, I am acquainted 
with the history of the matter treated of. And yet, most 
momentous transactions, transactions involving the fate 
of millions of human beings, have been committed to the 
hands of this man! 

It is not unnecessary for me to observe that, though I 
have stated the meaning of this note in a way for it to be 
understood, I by no means think, that even in the words 
in which I have expressed it, it was a proper note for the 
occasion. It was false in professions; and it was, as 
towards the King of France, insolent in a high degree. 
Even if it had been just to compel the king to abolish 
the slave trade, the matter might have been expressed in 
a less offensive manner ; and, at any rate, he might have 
been spared the brutal taunt that we meet with towards 
the close of this matchless specimen of diplomatic stu- 
pidity. 

Hoping that this book will outlive the recollection of 
the transactions treated of by the papers on which I have 
been remarking, it seems no more than justice to the 
parties to say that the abolition, which was thus extorted, 
had effect but for a very short time; and the French 
nation never acknowledged it as binding; that at this 
moment (June, 1822), complaints are made in the House 
of Commons of the breach of agreement on the part of 
the French ; that the French have revived and do carry 
on the traffic in African slaves ; that our ministers promise 
to make remonstrance; but that thev dare not talk of 



260 Six Lessons* 

war; and that without declaring their readiness for war, 
their remonstrances can have no effect. 



LESSON VI. 

Remarks on passages hi Dispatches from the Marquis 
Wellesley, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, to Viscount 
Sidmouth, and to Mr. Peel, Secretaries of State; dated 
Dublin Castle, from 3r7 January to 12th June, 1822 ; 
and also on the charge of the Bishop of Winchester, 
delivered in July, 1822. 

31. u Concluding that your lordship had been apprised, before' my 
arrival in Dublin, of every important circumstance respecting the 
unhappy disturbances which have prevailed in this country, I pro- 
ceed to submit to you, for his Majesty's consideration, such informa- 
tion as I have received on that subject during the few days that I 
have passed since my succession to this government. 

82. * ' I propose to arrange this information with reference to each 
county respectively, for the purpose of facilitating a comparison with 
such statements as may already be in your lordship's possession, 
and of enabling you to form a judgment of the relative state of each 
particular district at the different periods of time specified in each 
document." 

The marquis's style is not, in general, low and clumsy; 
it has the opposite faults, affectation and foppishness ; 
and where the meaning of the writer is obscure, it is not 
so much because he has not a clear head as because he 
cannot condescend to talk in the language and manner of 
common mortals. 

"Had been apprised before of disturbances which have 
prevailed" presents great confusion as to times. "We 
can hardly come at the precise meaning. It should have 
been : " Concluding that, before my arrival, your lordship 
was apprised of every important circumstance respecting 
the unhappy disturbances prevailing in this country." 
For the prevalence was still in existence. To submit is 



Marquis Wellesleys Dispatches. 261 

to place at the disposal of, to put under the poicer of; 
and, therefore, transmit, or send, was the proper word ; 
for it is the king to whom the information is submitted. 
The marquis sent the information to Lord Sidmouth that 
he might submit it to the king. 

u Successio7i to this government" is a strangely pompous 
phrase at best. But it is not correct; for his succession 
(if it were one) took place at his appointment; and he is 
about to speak of what he has learned since his arrival 
in Dublin ; and why not say arrival? 

The 32d paragraph is, perhaps, as complete a specimen of 
smoothness in words and of obscurity in meaning as ever 
found its way upon paper ; and yet this was an occasion 
for being particularly clear, seeing that the marquis was 
here explaining the plan of his dispatch. With reference 
to, means in relation to, as appertaining to, having a view 
towards. The first is the best for the marquis : and that 
is little short of nonsense ; for what is arranging infor- 
mation in relation to each county? What does it mean? 
Not what the marquis thought he was saying, which was 
that he proposed to speak of the state of all the counties, 
and that the infor?nation relating to each county he 
meant to place under a separate head. This was what he 5 
meant ; but this he does not say. 

And then again, what does respectively do here after 
each? Respectively means particularly or relatively; 
and as he had before said, or meant to say, that he pro- 
posed to place the information relating to each county 
under the head of that county, what need was there of 
the addition of this long and noisy adverb 1 

To be sure, to place the information under separate 
heads, each head confining itself to the information relat- 
ing to one county, was a very good way of facilitating a 
comparison of this information with that which was 
already in Lord Sidmouth's possession; but it was not 
enough to say "facilitating a comparison with such 



262 Six Lessons. 

statements/ 1 and there appears, besides, to be no reason 
to conclude that the information before possessed was 
arranged according to counties; on the contrary, the 
marquis's laying down of his plan would induce us 
to suppose that the arrangement of his matter was 
new. 

The latter part of the sentence is all confusion. The 
marquis means that, by placing his information as before 
described, he shall enable Lord Sidmouth to form a judg- 
ment of the state of each district, now, compared with 
the state in which it was at the date of the former 
information. The "relative state of each particular dis- 
trict " may mean its state at one period compared with its 
state at another period; but "at different periods of 
time " by no means gives us this idea. And, even if it 
did, what are we to do with the " each document " at the 
close? Each means one of ttco, one of more than one. 
So that here we have the relative state of a district at the 
different periods of time specified in one document; and 
the main point that the marquis was chiving at was to 
show Lord Sidmouth the manner in which he was going 
to enable him to compare the contents of the present 
document with those of the documents already held in 
his possession. 

I have taken here the first two sentences of the dis- 
patch. They are a fair specimen of the marquis's style, 
the great characteristic of which is obscurity arising from 
affectation. What he meant was this : " I propose to 
place the information relating to each county under a 
distinct head, for the purpose of facilitating a comparison 
of this information with that which your lordship may 
already possess, and also for the purpose of enabling you 
to form a judgment of the present state of each county, 
compared with the state in which it was at the date of 
former dispatches." And would it not have been better 
to write thus than to put upon paper a parcel of words. 



Marquis Wellesleys Dispatches. 263 

the meaning of which, even if you read them a hundred 
times over, must still remain a matter of uncertainty ? 

But there is another fault here; and that is, all the 
latter part of the sentence is a mere redundancy; for of 
what was Lord Sidmouth to "form a judgment?" A 
judgment of the comparative state of the country at the 
two periods \ "What could this be more than the making 
of the comparison? Judgment, in this case, means 
opinion; and if the marquis had said that his object 
was to enable Lord Sidmouth to form a judgment as to 
ichat ought to be done, for instance, in consequence of the 
change in the state of the country, there would have been 
some sense in it ; but to enable him to see the change was 
all that the marquis was talking about ; and the very act 
of making the comparison was to discern, ox judge of, the 
change. 

It is not my intention to swell out these remarks, or, 
with this dispatch before me, I could go on to a great 
extent indeed. Some few passages I cannot, however, 
refrain from just pointing out to you. 

33. "The commanding officer at Bantry reports a daring attack 
made a few nights previously, on several very respectable houses 
in the immediate vicinity of that town, by a numerous banditti, who 
succeeded in obtaining arms from many; and the officer stationed 
at Skibbereen states his opinion that the spirit of disaffection, which 
had been confined to the northern baronies of the county, had spread 
in an alarming measure through the whole of West Carbury; that 
nightly meetings are held at various places on the coast, and that 
bands of offenders assemble, consisting of not less than three hun- 
dred in each band. 

34. "It further appears, from various communications, that the 
greater part of the population of the northern part of the county of 
Cork had assembled in the mountains, and that they have in some 
places made demonstrations of attack, and in others have C ommi tted 
outrages by day, with increased force and boldness." 

"Reports an attack" is of the slang military, and 
should not have forced its way into this dispatch. "States 
his opinion that," is little better. But it is to the strange 



264 Six Wessons. 

confusion in the times of the verbs that I here wish to 
direct your attention. This is a fault the marquis very 
frequently commits. 

I cannot help drawing your attention to "a numerous banditti" 
and "not less than three hundred men." Banditti is plural, and 
therefore the a ought to be left out. Less is the comparative of 
little, used with reference to quantity; but inert are not a quantity, 
but a number, and the comparative of few, which is fewer, ought to 
have been used here. 

35. " The magistrates resident at Dunmanaway report that illegal 
oaths have for a long time been administered in that neighborhood; 
that nocturnal meetings have frequently been held; that in the 
adjoining parishes, notices of an inflammatory description have 
been posted ; and in one parish, arms have been taken from the 
peaceable inhabitants. 

36. "The Rector of reports, on the 10th, that six houses of 

his parishioners had been attacked on the preceding night, and 
some arms obtained from them, and then an attempt had been 
made to assassinate Captain Bernard, an active yeomanry officer, 
when only a short distance behind his corps, but that, owing to the 
pistol presented at him missing fire, he escaped, and his brother 
shot the assailant." 

We do not know from the words " have for a long time 
been administered," whether the oaths were administered 
a long time ago, or are now, and long have been adminis- 
tering. The that should have been repeated between the 
and and the in towards the close of paragraph 35 ; for 
the want of it takes the last fact out of the report of the 
magistrates, and makes it an assertion of the marquis. 
The same remark applies to the 36th paragraph, where, 
for the want of the that between the and and the then, it 
is the marquis, and not the rector, who asserts the fact 
of an attempt to assassinate the captain. An odd sort of 
an attempt to assassinate, by-the-bye, seeing that it was 
made by a pistol openly presented at him, and that, too, 
when his troop was just on before, and when his brother 
was so near at hand as to be able to shoot the assailant! 
But assassinate is become a fashionable word in such cases. 



Marquis Welleshys Dispatches. 265 

37. " On the evening of the same day a detachment of the 11th 
Regiment was attacked, on its march from Macroom to Bandon, 
by a party of sixty men, who followed it for three miles, and took 
advantage of the inclosures to fire, and to retard the march of the 
king 1 s troops.''' 

The meaning is that the party of sixty men followed it 
(the regiment), took advantage of the inclosures to fire on 
it, and to retard its march ; but the marquis, from a de- 
sire to write Jine, leaves us in doubt whether the regiment 
and the king's troops be the same body of men ; and this 
doubt is, indeed, countenanced by the almost incredible 
circumstance that a regular regiment should he followed 
for three miles, and actually have its march retarded by 
sixty men! 

38. " A countryman's house is also stated to have been attacked 
by forty men, well mounted and armed, who severely beat and 

wounded him, and took his horse. reports an attack on the 

house of Mr. Sweet, near Macroom, who, having received previous 
intimation of the attack, and having prepared for defence, suc- 
ceeded in repulsing the assailants, about two hundred in number, 
with a loss of tico killed, who were carried off by their associates, 
although their horses were secured." 

Here we have reports an attack again; but your atten- 
tion is called to the latter part of the paragraph, where 
it would appeal' that Mr. Sweet sustained a loss of two 
killed; and yet these two dead men were carried off by 
their assailants. If the marquis had stopped at the word 
killed, it would have been impossible not to understand 
him to mean that Mr. Sweet had two of his men killed. 

39. ' ' A magistrate communicates that information had been 
received by him of several intended attacks upon houses in that 
neighborhood, but that they had been prevented by the judicious 
employment of the police, stationed at Sallans, under the Peace 
Preservation Act." 

By employing the police in a judicious manner, the 
marquis means ; but says quite another thing. 

40 ''The police magistrate at Westmeath reports the setting fire 
12 



266 Six Lessons. 

to a farmer's outhouses, which, together with the cattle in them, 
WAS consumed." 

It should be "the setting o/fire;" and it should be 
were, and not was; for the deuce is in it if out-houses, 
together with the cattle in them, do not make up & plural. 

41. " The result of the facts stated in this dispatch, and its incis- 
ures, seems to justify an opinion that, although no material change 
has occurred in any other part of Ireland, the disturbances in the 
vicinity of Macroom ham assumed a more decided aspect of general 
disorder, and accordingly I have resorted to additional measures of 
precaution and military operation." 

There should be an in between the and and the its. 
But, it is not the result of the facts that seems to justify 
the opinion ; it is the facts themselves that justify the 
opinion, and the opinion is* the result. Measures of 
military operation, too, is an odd sort of phrase. This 
paragraph is all bad, from beginning to end; but I am 
merely pointing out prominent and gross errors. 

42. " Another magistrate reports several robberies of arms in the 
parishes of Skull and Kilmore, and the burning of a corn-store at 
Crookhaven; and another, in representing the alarming state of 
the country, adds, that the object of the insurgents, in one district 
at least, has not been confined to the lowering of rents and tithes, 
but extended to the refusal also of the priesfs dues." 

To rob applies to the person or thing from whom or 
which something is violently and unlawfully taken. Men 
rob a man of his money, or a house of its goods ; but it 
is not the money and goods that are robbed. Yet this is 
a very common phrase with the marquis, who, in other 
places, talks of "plundering arms from people," and who, 
by saying "six hundred and seventy-six frearms" and 
the like, leaves us clearly to understand that he is at 
liberty to use this noun in the singular, and, of course, 
to say a fire-arm whenever he may choose ; a liberty, 
however, which I would, my dear James, earnestly recom- 
mend to you never to think of taking. 



Marquis Wellesley's Dispatches. 267 

To confine and extend an object does not seem to be 
very clear sense ; and, at any rate, to say that the object 
of lowering rents and tithes has been extended to the 
refusal also of the priest's dues makes sad work indeed. 
Without the also, the thing might pass ; but that word 
makes this part of the sentence downright nonsense. 

43. "No additional military force, no improvement nor augmen- 
tation of the police, would now be effectual without the aid of the 
Insurrection Act ; with that aid it appears to be rational to expect 
that tranquillity may be maintained, confirmed, and extended 
throughout Ireland. It is, therefore, my duty, in every view, to 
request the renewal of the law, of which the operation forms the 
subject of this dispatch." 

Did any man, in any writing of any sort, ever before 
meet with anything like this? Suppose I were to say, 
"the writings of which the inaccuracies form the subject 
of these remarks," what would the world think and say of 
me? This is indeed "prose run macV 

Cobbett means, of course, that we should say, "the writings, the 
inaccuracies of which " ; but we can now say, ' ' the writings whose 
inaccuracies," which sounds much more smooth and elegant. 

44. "With respect to Westmeath, the chief magistrate of police 
has stated the revival of those parti/ feuds and personal conflicts in 
the neighborhood of Mullingar, which are considered in this coun- 
try to be indications of the return of public tranquillity, and from 
which the magistrate expects the detection of past offences against 
the state." 

One loses sight of everything about language here, in 
contemplating the shocking, the horrible fact ! For, what 
is so horrible as the fact here officially stated, that party 
feuds and personal conflicts are deemed indications favor- 
able to the government, and that they are expected by the 
magistrate to lead to the detection of past offences against 
the state! As to the grammar: to "state the revival" is 
just as good English as it would be to say that the magis- 
trate has stated the fine weather. The " the return " ought 
to be " a return." 



268 Six Lessons. 

45. "The early expiration of the Act would, at least, hazard the 
revival of that tyranny ; the restraints imposed on violence have not 
yet been of sufficient duration to form any solid foundation of a 
better and more disciplined disposition in the minds of the people. 
Even now it is believed that arms are retained in tlie hope of the 
expiration of the law on the 1st of August; 8Dd although a more 
auspicious sentiment may exist in the hearts of some, even of the 
guilty, it would be contrary to all prudent policy and provident wis- 
dom, by a premature relaxation of the law, to afford facility to the 
accomplishment of the worst designs, and to weaken the protec- 
tions and safeguards, which now secure the lives and properties. of 
the loyal and obedient, before the spirit of outrage had been effect- 
ually extinguished." 

" To hazard the revival " is not correct. To hazard is 
to expose to danger; and certainly the marquis did not 
mean that the revival of the tyranny was a thing that 
ought not to be put in danger. The word hazard had no 
business there. Another mode of expression ought to 
have been used; such as, "exposed the country to the 
danger of the revival of the tyranny." 

The semicolon after tyranny ought to have been a full- 
point, " In the hope of the expiration " is bad enough ; 
but it is the arrangement of this sentence, the placing 
of the several parts of it, which is most worthy of your 
attention, and which ought to be a warning to every one 
who takes pen in hand. 

"Prudent policy and provident wisdom " would seem to 
say that there are such things as imprudent policy and 
improvident wisdom ; but, still, all the rest is inferior, in 
point of importance, to the confusion which follows, and 
which leaves you wholly in doubt as to the meaning of 
the writer. Now, observe with what facility this mass of 
confusion is reduced to order, and that, too, without add- 
ing to or taking from the marquis one single word. I 
begin after the word wisdom : "to afford, by a premature 
relaxation of the law, facility to the accomplishment of 
the worst designs, and to weaken, before the spirit of 
outrage had been effectually extinguished, the safeguards 



Bishop of Winchesters Charge. 269 

which now secure the lives and properties of the loyal 
and obedient." 

How clear this is ! And how much more harmonious 
and more elegant, too, than the sentence of the marquis ; 
and yet the words are all the same identical words! 
Towards the close of Letter XXI, I gave you, from Dr. 
Johnson and Dr. "Watts, some striking instances of the 
wrong placing of words in sentences; and, lest these 
should be insufficient to keep so great a man as the mar- 
quis in countenance, I will here show that a bishop can 
commit errors of the same sort and greater in degree. 

Before passing to the bishop, is it not worth while to pause a 
moment to notice the remarkable fact, that, in the matter of outrages 
and violence, the Irish seem to have been just as bad at the begin- 
ning of the century as they are now toward the end of it ? What a 
familiar picture of outrage and violence these dispatches present, 
and what a time the English have had in governing the people of 
this ' ' ever faithful " isle ! The government has certainly improved 
since the time these dispatches were written ; and yet what shall 
we say of the advance made by the people ? Are all these murders 
and assassinations of the present day the result of English tyranny 
and injustice, or are they the result of other causes? What have 
the Church, the press, and the schools done to improve the char- 
acter of the Irish people ? I fear that if these were weighed in the 
balance, they would all be found wanting. The French under the 
Napoleons and the Germans under Bismarck have suffered ten 
times more oppression than the Irish under Victoria, without com- 
mitting one tenth as many crimes ; and the reason of this is, that 
the French and the Germans are better educated than the Irish. 
They have the moral sense to perceive that the commission of crime 
no more leads to national liberty than to personal happiness. Not 
the least important part of that education in which the Irish are 
lacking, is the practice of economy and foresight in the affairs of 
daily life. Out of every hundred Frenchmen, at least ninety-five 
save something every year; and the proportion of saving people 
among the Germans is perhaps still greater. Now I am positive 
that, among the Irish, not ten in a hundred ever think of saving 
anything ; and this is one cause of the misery and starvation that 
periodically overtakes them. 

I have before me "A Charge delivered to the Clergy of 



270 Sh- Lessons. 

the Diocese of Winchester, at a primary visitation- of 

that diocese, by George Tomxixe, D.D.. F.R.S., Lord 
Bishop of Winchester, Prelate of the most Noble Order 
of the Garter." We will not stop here to inquire what a 
prelate's office may require of him relative to an Order 
which history tells us arose out of a -favorite lady drop- 
ping her garter at a dance; but I must observe that, as 
the titles here stand, it would appeal' that the last is 
deemed the most honorable and of most importance to the 
clergy ! This bishop,, whose name was Pretttmax, was 
the tutor of that William Pitt who was called the Jteaven- 
born minister, and a history of whose life has been written 
by this bishoj). So that we have here, a Doctor of Di- 
vinity* a Fellow of the Loyal Society, a Prelate of the 
most JSToble Order of the Garter, and a Bishop of one of 
the richest Sees in the whole world, who, besides, is an 
Historian* and was Tutor to a heaven-born minister. Let 
us see then what sort of writing comes from such a 
source. I could take an incorrect sentence. I could even 
take a specimen of downright nonsense, from almost any 
page of the Charge. But I shall content myself with the 
very first sentence of it. 

46. "My reverend brethren, being called to preside over this 
distinguished diocese, at a late period of life. I have thought it 
incumbent upon me not to delay the opportunity of becoming per- 
sonally acquainted with my clergy longer than circumstances ren- 
dered absolutely necessary." 

There are two double meanings in this short sentence. 
Was he called at some former time, to preside over the 
diocese when he should become old ? or was he, when he 
had become old, called to preside over the diocese? But 
what follows is still worse. Does he mean that he thought 
it incumbent on him to become acquainted with his clergy 
as soon as possible, or in as short a time as possible/ To 
delay an opportunity is not very good: and that which is 
of a man's own appointment, and which proceeds purely 



Bishop of Winchester s Charge. 271 

from his own will, cannot strictly be called an opportunity. 
But it is the double meaning, occasioned by the wrong- 
placing of the words, that I wish you to attend to. 

Now, see how easily the sentence might, with the same 
words, have been made unequivocal, clear, and elegant: 
u My Reverend Brethren, being called, at a late period of 
life, to preside over this distinguished diocese, I have 
thought it incumbent on me not to delay, longer than 
circumstances rendered absolutely necessary, the oppor- 
tunity of becoming personally acquainted with my clergy." 

How easy it was to write thus ! And yet this bishop 
did not know how to do it. I dare say that he corrected 
and re-corrected every sentence of this charge. And yet 
what bungling work it is, after all ! And these are your 
college and university bred men ! These are the men who 
are called Doctors on account of their literary acquire- 
ments, doctus being the Latin word for learned! Thus 
it is that the mass of mankind have been imposed upon 
by big sounding names, which, however, have seldom 
failed to insure, to those who have assumed them, power, 
ease, luxury, and splendor, at the expense of those who 
have been foolish or base enough to acquiesce, or to 
seem to acquiesce, in the fitness of the assumption. 

Such acquiescence is not, however, so general nowa- 
days as it formerly was ; and the chagrin which the "Doc- 
tors" feel at the change is not more evident than it is 
amusing. In the very charge which I have just quoted, 
the tutor of the heaven-born minister says, "A spirit is 
still manifest amongst us, producing an impatience of 
control, a reluctance to acknowledge superiority, and an 
eagerness to call in question the expediency of established 
forms and customs." "What! is it, then, a sin; is it an 
offence against God, to be reluctant to " acknowledge 
superiority " in a bishop who cannot write so well as our- 
selves? Oh, no! "We are not to be censured, because 
we doubt of the expediency of those establishments, those 



272 Six Lessons. 

colleges and universities, which cause immense revenues, 
arising from public property, to be expended on the edu- 
cation of men, who, after all, can produce, in the literary 
way, nothing better than writings such as those on which 
we have now been remarking. 

The nature of the faults in these extracts may, perhaps, be made 
still clearer by calling your attention to the two kinds of sentences 
called loose and periodic. A loose sentence is one in which the 
sense is complete at the end of any phrase or clause in it, whereas 
a periodic sentence keeps the sense suspended till the end. The 
latter is generally preferable to the former. For instance; u We 
have learned to speak and write English correctly, in a few months, 
by means of this little book, in spite of many obstacles." This is a 
loose sentence ; so loose that any member of it may be dropped 
without injuring the sense. Now let us put it in a periodic form, 
and you will see that you can come to a full-stop nowhere except 
at the end. "By means of this little book, we have, in a few 
months, in spite of many obstacles, learned to speak and write 
English correctly." 



THE END. 



What the Press thinks of Mr. Waters' New Book. 

HOW TO GET ON IN THE WORLD : 

As demonstrated by the life and language of 

WILLIAM COBBETT. 

TO WHICH IS ADDED 

COBBETT'S ENGLISH GRAMMAR WITH NOTES 
By ROBERT WATERS, 

TEACHER OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE IN THE HOBOKEN (N. J.) ACADEMY. 



PHICE - - - - $1.75. 



Mr. Waters' edition of Cobbett' s Grammar was originally, as 
above indicated, published as an addition to the Life of Cobbett 
The publication of the Grammar separately was an after-thought. 
The book, in its original form, has been universally praised by the 
critics, and the first edition is now nearly exhausted after a three 
months' sale. Of the scores of favorable criticisms, we select a 
few. 

A BOOK FOR AMERICAN BOYS. 

From the Hartford Times of July 11. 

" How to get on in the world" is precisely what every bright 
American boy most of all wants to know ; and how it has been 
done by others, and can be done to-day, is nowhere better demon- 
strated than in the life and language of William Cobbett. Cobbett 
pushed his way up to eminence from the very limited field afforded 
to an English farmer-boy, and, through years of discipline as a 
common soldier, reached a station where he was universally known 
and respected, and attained a position of preeminent importance 
among the men of his time. His life has been written by various 
writers; but this "Life" by Mr. Waters may be pronounced the 
best yet given to the public, because it not only presents fairly all 



2 Opinions of the Press. 

the facts connected with Cobbett's remarkable career, but is 
written with the excellent motive of telling boys and young men 
how to get on in the world, honestly and successfully. Cobbett was 
a man of tremendous pluck and energy, and he "got on," of 
course, with no other education than that acquired by himself 
under most adverse circumstances ; he became one of the pro- 
foundest thinkers of his time, and wrote the best of vigorous and 
and absolutely pure English. 

INTERESTING AS A NOVEL. 

From the New York Times of July 4. 

Few biographies are more interesting than those of the "self- 
made " Cobbett : his life is like the imaginative life of the hero of 
a novel by Goodwin. He came in contact with many great and 
celebrated men ; visited and lived in America several times ; was 
a disciple of ideas generated by the French revolution ; alternately 
denounced and lauded the United States ; was now a successful 
pamphleteer and publisher : now the inmate of a prison ; now 
the admired and feared spokesman of some well-defined cause in 
the House of Commons. Mr. Waters incorporates into his work 
Cobbett's English Grammar with notes, because he believes it is 
the only grammar capable of interesting children: with it the 
dullest, most lifeless teacher must succeed in teaching, and the 
dullest, most lifeless scholar must succeed in learning, the principles 
of English grammar." 

A CLASSIC ENGLISH. 

From the Belletristisches Journal of June 27. 

The first part of the book contains an uncommonly interesting 
and instructive biography of William Cobbett. Mr. Waters has 
himself attained to such a degree the masterly style of Cobbett, 
that the perusal of this biography may be safely recommended to 
all those who wish to enjoy classic English. 

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS' VIEW CONFIRMED. 

From the Toronto Globe of July 28. 

As Mr. Waters has caught something of the vivacious directness 
of Cobbett's style, his book is very interesting reading. Cobbett 
was not a man of the highest order in respect of either character 
or intellect, but he was a capital writer of English prose. The 
excellence of his style is a proof of the correctness of Charles 



Opinions of the Press. 3 

Francis Adams' view, that a knowledge of the ancient languages 
is not necessary for good writing. The English writer whom 
Cobbett most admired was Swift, and the studies which prepared 
his mind for the work of life were confined to the English and 
French literatures and languages. Like Tyndall, he took great 
delight in grammar, and it is by his books on this subject that he 
will probably be longest remembered. The long life of his gram- 
mars is due partly to his unexcelled faculty for exposition and 
partly to the glimpses which they, like all the rest of his works, 
afford of the sturdy, homely, shrewd Anglo-Saxon who wrote 
them . 

MAKES GRAMMAR A FAVORITE STUDY. 

From the Rural Neic- Yorker of August 11. 

This is a work which should be placed in the hands of every 
scholar. Many young people dislike to study grammar, and 
declare that they never can understand it. Yet it is of vast im- 
portance that they should do so, and thoroughly too. If this work 
were universally used in our schools, both public and private, the 
old feeling of distaste for the study of grammar would exist no 

longer ; it would become one of the favorite studies 

The biography is full of interest, showing Cobbett's ability as a 
farmer, a soldier, and a writer. 

Atf INTERESTING AND AMUSING BOOK. 

From the Christian Advocate of August 2. 

Cobbett is recognized by scholars as a master a of the English 
tongue, and as the author of a grammar which has many marks 
of genius, distinguished from all others in that it is amusing. 
Mr. Waters' book gives a good view of Cobbett's life, and contains 
also his Grammar with notes. It is an interesting and amusing 
book, and gives a fair picture of a man of great gifts and 
enormous conceit. 

THE GRAMMAR IS COBBETT HIMSELF. 

From the Christian Union of August 16. 

This volume is a very readable account of one of England's self- 
made men. The Cobbett style of journalism, however, is passing 
away. Cobbett's coarse, bitter, vindictive personalities would not 
be tolerated in any reputable newspaper to-day : his unmeasured 
egotism would subject him to laughter which even that egotism 



4 Opinions of the Press. 

could not survive ; and his extreme partisanship, not to say 
mendacity, would take away much of the weight which, in his own 
time, was attached to many of his utterances. But his writings 
are characterized by a coarse, rugged, homely vigor; a biting, 
raspy humor; a superlative common sense about common things; 
and a perfect translucence, which put them at the head of what may 
be called strong writing ; and if anyone can learn anything by 
" reading for style," Cobbett is a model for study in these particu- 
lars. No young man can read this story of Cobbett's early 
struggles and triumphs, without being inspired with the thought 
that work was the most important factor in his success. The Gram- 
mar is Cobbett himself: dogmatic, prejudiced, polemical, and 
clear as a spring. With the editor's notes, it is perhaps the most 
readable part of the book. 

READS LIKE A ROMANCE. 

From the Scottish American Journal of August 30. 

This work gives the best account of the life of William Cobbett 
which has yet appeared. Cobbett's life reads like a romance, and 
in Mr. Waters' hand the story is told in such a way as to charm 
even the most ordinary reader. Unlike previous biographers of 
the great English tribune, Mr. Waters never becomes partisan; he 
reviews the events of which he speaks in a decidedly impartial 
spirit, and, by so doing, gives one a better idea of the real great- 
ness of the man than by reading a hundred volumes of persistent 
eulogy. The " Grammar "is Cobbett's most enduring work, and 
is the most readable production of the kind which has ever ap- 
peared in print. 

NO BETTER PRESENT FOR A YOUNG PERSON. 

From the Muscatine (Iowa) Daily Journal. 

This is one of the best and most interesting books, especially 
for young men, that has come under our notice. We cannot wish 
a young person, who is striving to get on in the world, a better 
present than this book. It is at once entertaining, instructive, and 
invigorating, and will do one more good than a summer vacation. 







7 ^ 



